All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com>
To: "K.Prasad" <prasad@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>,
	Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>,
	Paul Mundt <lethal@linux-sh.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/6] hw_breakpoints: Breakpoints arch ability don't need perf events
Date: Mon, 4 Jul 2011 15:37:54 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20110704133752.GC5551@somewhere> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20110704133223.GB2963@in.ibm.com>

On Mon, Jul 04, 2011 at 07:02:23PM +0530, K.Prasad wrote:
> On Tue, May 24, 2011 at 11:52:25PM +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> > The breakpoint support ability in an arch is not related
> > to the fact perf events is built or not. HAVE_HW_BREAKPOINT
> > only shows an ability so this dependency makes no sense
> > anymore. Archs that select HAVE_HW_BREAKPOINT already
> > ensure that perf event is built.
> > 
> > Remove that dependency.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com>
> > Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
> > Cc: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
> > Cc: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>
> > Cc: Prasad <prasad@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
> > Cc: Paul Mundt <lethal@linux-sh.org>
> > ---
> >  arch/Kconfig |    1 -
> >  1 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/arch/Kconfig b/arch/Kconfig
> > index f78c2be..ce4be89 100644
> > --- a/arch/Kconfig
> > +++ b/arch/Kconfig
> > @@ -149,7 +149,6 @@ config HAVE_DEFAULT_NO_SPIN_MUTEXES
> > 
> >  config HAVE_HW_BREAKPOINT
> >  	bool
> > -	depends on PERF_EVENTS
> > 
> >  config HAVE_MIXED_BREAKPOINTS_REGS
> >  	bool
> > -- 
> 
> Just a thought you might want to consider...
> 
> The need to keep the ability (HAVE_HW_BREAKPOINT) and the user-choice to
> enable hardware breakpoints (through HW_BREAKPOINT) in separate config
> options isn't very clear to me (and is a bit confusing with very similar
> names).
> 
> Why not make HAVE_HW_BREAKPOINT selectable by the user (which in turn
> would turn on PERF_EVENTS) for a given architecture?

But then how kconfig knows if the allows that? You need to know if the
arch has the ability to support breakpoints.

This is a commin pattern in Linux Kconfig. Things are often seperated between
ability (some constant value provided by the arch) and the user choice that
depends on that ability.
The advantage of doing this is that you can centralize the generic dependencies,
help menu, etc... into a single place.
 
> Thanks,
> K.Prasad
> 

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com>
To: "K.Prasad" <prasad@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>,
	Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Paul Mundt <lethal@linux-sh.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
	linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/6] hw_breakpoints: Breakpoints arch ability don't need perf events
Date: Mon, 4 Jul 2011 15:37:54 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20110704133752.GC5551@somewhere> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20110704133223.GB2963@in.ibm.com>

On Mon, Jul 04, 2011 at 07:02:23PM +0530, K.Prasad wrote:
> On Tue, May 24, 2011 at 11:52:25PM +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> > The breakpoint support ability in an arch is not related
> > to the fact perf events is built or not. HAVE_HW_BREAKPOINT
> > only shows an ability so this dependency makes no sense
> > anymore. Archs that select HAVE_HW_BREAKPOINT already
> > ensure that perf event is built.
> > 
> > Remove that dependency.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com>
> > Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
> > Cc: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
> > Cc: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>
> > Cc: Prasad <prasad@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
> > Cc: Paul Mundt <lethal@linux-sh.org>
> > ---
> >  arch/Kconfig |    1 -
> >  1 files changed, 0 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/arch/Kconfig b/arch/Kconfig
> > index f78c2be..ce4be89 100644
> > --- a/arch/Kconfig
> > +++ b/arch/Kconfig
> > @@ -149,7 +149,6 @@ config HAVE_DEFAULT_NO_SPIN_MUTEXES
> > 
> >  config HAVE_HW_BREAKPOINT
> >  	bool
> > -	depends on PERF_EVENTS
> > 
> >  config HAVE_MIXED_BREAKPOINTS_REGS
> >  	bool
> > -- 
> 
> Just a thought you might want to consider...
> 
> The need to keep the ability (HAVE_HW_BREAKPOINT) and the user-choice to
> enable hardware breakpoints (through HW_BREAKPOINT) in separate config
> options isn't very clear to me (and is a bit confusing with very similar
> names).
> 
> Why not make HAVE_HW_BREAKPOINT selectable by the user (which in turn
> would turn on PERF_EVENTS) for a given architecture?

But then how kconfig knows if the allows that? You need to know if the
arch has the ability to support breakpoints.

This is a commin pattern in Linux Kconfig. Things are often seperated between
ability (some constant value provided by the arch) and the user choice that
depends on that ability.
The advantage of doing this is that you can centralize the generic dependencies,
help menu, etc... into a single place.
 
> Thanks,
> K.Prasad
> 

  reply	other threads:[~2011-07-04 13:38 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 28+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2011-05-24 21:52 [PATCH v2] hw_breakpoint: Let the user choose not to build it (and perf too) Frederic Weisbecker
2011-05-24 21:52 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2011-05-24 21:52 ` [PATCH 1/6] hw_breakpoints: Split hardware breakpoints config Frederic Weisbecker
2011-05-24 21:52   ` Frederic Weisbecker
2011-05-24 21:52 ` [PATCH 2/6] hw_breakpoints: Migrate breakpoint conditional build under new config Frederic Weisbecker
2011-05-24 21:52   ` Frederic Weisbecker
2011-07-04 13:27   ` K.Prasad
2011-07-04 13:27     ` K.Prasad
2011-07-04 13:29     ` Frederic Weisbecker
2011-07-04 13:29       ` Frederic Weisbecker
2011-07-04 17:44       ` K.Prasad
2011-07-05 13:49         ` Frederic Weisbecker
2011-05-24 21:52 ` [PATCH 3/6] x86: Allow the user not to build hw_breakpoints Frederic Weisbecker
2011-05-24 21:52   ` Frederic Weisbecker
2011-05-24 21:52 ` [PATCH 4/6] hw_breakpoints: Breakpoints arch ability don't need perf events Frederic Weisbecker
2011-05-24 21:52   ` Frederic Weisbecker
2011-07-04 13:32   ` K.Prasad
2011-07-04 13:32     ` K.Prasad
2011-07-04 13:37     ` Frederic Weisbecker [this message]
2011-07-04 13:37       ` Frederic Weisbecker
2011-05-24 21:52 ` [PATCH 5/6] hw_breakpoints: Only force perf events if breakpoints are selected Frederic Weisbecker
2011-05-24 21:52   ` Frederic Weisbecker
2011-05-24 21:52 ` [PATCH 6/6] hw_breakpoints: Drop remaining misplaced dependency on perf Frederic Weisbecker
2011-05-24 21:52   ` Frederic Weisbecker
2011-05-25  2:27 ` [PATCH v2] hw_breakpoint: Let the user choose not to build it (and perf too) Paul Mundt
2011-05-25  2:27   ` Paul Mundt
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2011-07-14 15:03 [GIT PULL] hw_breakpoints updates Frederic Weisbecker
2011-07-14 15:03 ` [PATCH 4/6] hw_breakpoints: Breakpoints arch ability don't need perf events Frederic Weisbecker
2011-04-27 16:59 [PATCH 0/6] hw_breakpoint: Let the user choose not to build it (and perf too) Frederic Weisbecker
2011-04-27 17:00 ` [PATCH 4/6] hw_breakpoints: Breakpoints arch ability don't need perf events Frederic Weisbecker

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20110704133752.GC5551@somewhere \
    --to=fweisbec@gmail.com \
    --cc=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
    --cc=lethal@linux-sh.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
    --cc=mingo@elte.hu \
    --cc=prasad@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=will.deacon@arm.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.