Re: [perfmon] Re: [perfmon2] perfmon2 merge news

[Stephane Eranian <eranian@hpl.hp.com>]

Greg,

On Tue, Nov 13, 2007 at 10:59:24AM -0800, Greg KH wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 13, 2007 at 10:47:45AM -0800, Philip Mucci wrote:
> > Hi folks,
> >
> > Well, I can say the mood here at supercomputing'07 is pretty somber in 
> > regards to the latest exchange of messages regarding the perfmon patches. 
> 
> "somber"?
> 

I am the core developer of this and I am not as pessimistic as Phil. Yet I admit
Phil has been asking for this kind of kernel interface for a very very long time ;-<

> Why?
> 
> We (a number of the kernel developers) want to see the perfmon code make
> it into the kernel tree, unfortunatly, in the current state it is in,
> that's not going to happen.
> 
> Andi specified a way that this can happen, just refactor your patches
> into smaller bits that can be reviewed and applied.
> 

I think I understand your concerns. I will work on this. I think it is possible to
refactor. It will certainly be painful (for me), but I think it can be done within
some reasonable delay. Of course, it would be help if you could better qualify what
you mean by 'smaller'.

> If you, or anyone else has any questions about this, please let us know.
> So far, I have not seen any response to his message, so I'm guessing
> that the perfmon developers either are off working on this, or don't
> care.
> 

I will start working on this once I fix the tickless/hrtimer issues.

> And if they don't care, then yes, I agree with your "somber" feeling...
> 

I do care a lot actually. Believe me, I do spend a lot of effort and energy
on this project everyday, like many others around the world, and I intend for
it to succeed. We have reached a point in the development of processor hardware
where this kind of features is crucial and it is not just for HPC folks anymore.

-- 
-Stephane