From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932166AbZKXHo4 (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 Nov 2009 02:44:56 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1755530AbZKXHo4 (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 Nov 2009 02:44:56 -0500 Received: from fg-out-1718.google.com ([72.14.220.158]:17934 "EHLO fg-out-1718.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752466AbZKXHoz (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 Nov 2009 02:44:55 -0500 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; b=INImlkIdlxeKQyNOEldmz7P3nFByiYvzveAJ587eHaz8Q2Hc/+2OGWiIT3SaR5r5Mp H/ceYP1MXwG1HMnq93JAcXTLleEDyi7QPVpX92Jsd/hulus4iBatSb8TVm5NMcM797HV iMkx8EZ21FwOxT4wG5v+/jI0UI84MFmmzyFkE= MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20091124073426.GA21991@elte.hu> References: <4B0B6E44.6090106@cn.fujitsu.com> <84144f020911232315h7c8b7348u9ad97f585f54a014@mail.gmail.com> <20091124073426.GA21991@elte.hu> Date: Tue, 24 Nov 2009 09:45:00 +0200 X-Google-Sender-Auth: 5ec080527512b907 Message-ID: <84144f020911232345j75c93ec6mf1fc426262c14eb0@mail.gmail.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/5] perf kmem: Add more functions and show more statistics From: Pekka Enberg To: Ingo Molnar Cc: Arjan van de Ven , Li Zefan , Eduard - Gabriel Munteanu , Peter Zijlstra , Frederic Weisbecker , LKML , "linux-mm@kvack.org" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi Ingo, On Tue, Nov 24, 2009 at 9:34 AM, Ingo Molnar wrote: > Certainly we can postpone it, as long as there's rough strategic > consensus on the way forward. I'd hate to have two overlapping core > kernel facilities and friction between the groups pursuing them and > constant distraction from having two targets. Sure, like I said, I think "kmem perf" is the way forward. The only reason we did kmemtrace userspace out-of-tree was because there was no perf (or ftrace!) at the time and there wasn't much interest in putting userspace tools in the tree. I hope that counts as a "rough strategic consensus" :-) From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail202.messagelabs.com (mail202.messagelabs.com [216.82.254.227]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 842776B0062 for ; Tue, 24 Nov 2009 02:45:03 -0500 (EST) Received: by fg-out-1718.google.com with SMTP id d23so2327643fga.8 for ; Mon, 23 Nov 2009 23:45:01 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20091124073426.GA21991@elte.hu> References: <4B0B6E44.6090106@cn.fujitsu.com> <84144f020911232315h7c8b7348u9ad97f585f54a014@mail.gmail.com> <20091124073426.GA21991@elte.hu> Date: Tue, 24 Nov 2009 09:45:00 +0200 Message-ID: <84144f020911232345j75c93ec6mf1fc426262c14eb0@mail.gmail.com> Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/5] perf kmem: Add more functions and show more statistics From: Pekka Enberg Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org To: Ingo Molnar Cc: Arjan van de Ven , Li Zefan , Eduard - Gabriel Munteanu , Peter Zijlstra , Frederic Weisbecker , LKML , "linux-mm@kvack.org" List-ID: Hi Ingo, On Tue, Nov 24, 2009 at 9:34 AM, Ingo Molnar wrote: > Certainly we can postpone it, as long as there's rough strategic > consensus on the way forward. I'd hate to have two overlapping core > kernel facilities and friction between the groups pursuing them and > constant distraction from having two targets. Sure, like I said, I think "kmem perf" is the way forward. The only reason we did kmemtrace userspace out-of-tree was because there was no perf (or ftrace!) at the time and there wasn't much interest in putting userspace tools in the tree. I hope that counts as a "rough strategic consensus" :-) -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: email@kvack.org