From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755319Ab0E2NTh (ORCPT ); Sat, 29 May 2010 09:19:37 -0400 Received: from mail-fx0-f46.google.com ([209.85.161.46]:46152 "EHLO mail-fx0-f46.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752929Ab0E2NTf (ORCPT ); Sat, 29 May 2010 09:19:35 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-type:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; b=a+bqbNfP0meJyOcA0TepPqWLnWmKaWN2U0IvUq2WSZe9xznzx6NqDOMqNAOUFYr+tB o+2WVtTDEIrMyaEI1BsDiCJo6yY8SAepqBBUdeHEIrrKHWURMxYSWrvF9Mun3ajTflbX diWGlKsiGFXMK/cCnZD1pPPFLapsJS39wvxs8= Date: Sat, 29 May 2010 17:19:31 +0400 From: Cyrill Gorcunov To: Peter Zijlstra Cc: Ingo Molnar , =?iso-8859-1?Q?Fr=E9d=E9ric?= Weisbecker , Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo , LKML Subject: Re: [Q] perf, x86: should perf_event_x.c being compiled conditionally? Message-ID: <20100529131931.GI5322@lenovo> References: <20100528213503.GJ20839@lenovo> <1275118737.27810.12590.camel@twins> <20100529130254.GH5322@lenovo> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20100529130254.GH5322@lenovo> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sat, May 29, 2010 at 05:02:54PM +0400, Cyrill Gorcunov wrote: > On Sat, May 29, 2010 at 09:38:57AM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > On Sat, 2010-05-29 at 01:35 +0400, Cyrill Gorcunov wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > > > while was building the kernel for pretty old laptop I've noticed > > > that perf_event_x.c depends on CONFIG_CPU_SUP_ only. So I'm somehow > > > confused. Should not some additional condition being used? > > > > > > For example if a person have Core 2 or Nehalem machine, he will > > > definitely not need p6 and p4 events (yes, they are not _that_ big > > > in size, but anyway). > > > > > > On the other hands distro builders would prefer to have all compiled in. > > > > > > Not sure about what is the best way to resolve this, but perhaps I'm just > > > missing some key moment? > > > > We had to split out on the CPU_SUP_* stuff because the AMD support > > relies on symbols otherwise not present. > > > > So fixing build dependencies is the main reason we have that. > > > > If you want to extend it, feel free, but be sure to test the > > full .config space ;-) > > > > Thanks for explanation. I guess we may have something like below. > Note that I didn't squeeze into *.c files, only Kconfig is touched > so that we get "Processor type and features" -> "Supported Perfomance > Events" menu. All entries are "Y" by default and depends on > PERF_EVENTS && CPU_SUP_INTEL (since we have this trick for Intel > cpus only at moment). Just an idea. > I'll take a more closer look (since we will need some placeholders for unconditionally called funtions). -- Cyrill