From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752055Ab1LRXpM (ORCPT ); Sun, 18 Dec 2011 18:45:12 -0500 Received: from mx3.mail.elte.hu ([157.181.1.138]:33812 "EHLO mx3.mail.elte.hu" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751991Ab1LRXpJ (ORCPT ); Sun, 18 Dec 2011 18:45:09 -0500 Date: Mon, 19 Dec 2011 00:43:10 +0100 From: Ingo Molnar To: Benjamin Block Cc: Hans Rosenfeld , hpa@zytor.com, tglx@linutronix.de, suresh.b.siddha@intel.com, eranian@google.com, brgerst@gmail.com, robert.richter@amd.com, Andreas.Herrmann3@amd.com, x86@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Benjamin Block Subject: Re: [RFC 4/5] x86, perf: implements lwp-perf-integration (rc1) Message-ID: <20111218234309.GA12958@elte.hu> References: <20111216160757.GL665@escobedo.osrc.amd.com> <1324051943-21112-1-git-send-email-hans.rosenfeld@amd.com> <1324051943-21112-4-git-send-email-hans.rosenfeld@amd.com> <20111218080443.GB4144@elte.hu> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) X-ELTE-SpamScore: -2.0 X-ELTE-SpamLevel: X-ELTE-SpamCheck: no X-ELTE-SpamVersion: ELTE 2.0 X-ELTE-SpamCheck-Details: score=-2.0 required=5.9 tests=AWL,BAYES_00 autolearn=no SpamAssassin version=3.3.1 -2.0 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% [score: 0.0000] 0.0 AWL AWL: From: address is in the auto white-list Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org * Benjamin Block wrote: > The threshold-interrupt is already integrated with patch 5 of > this patch-set. > > Maybe I wrote the descriptions a little misleading. Sry for > that. :) Okay, i stopped reading at the first patch that claimed that the threshold irq was not supported ;-) So the question becomes, how well is it integrated: can perf 'record -a + perf report', or 'perf top' use LWP, to do system-wide precise [user-space] profiling and such? Thanks, Ingo