Re: [PATCH] Separate performance counter reservation from nmi watchdog

[Björn Steinbrink <B.Steinbrink@gmx.de>]

On 2007.06.18 02:52:38 -0700, Stephane Eranian wrote:
> Hello Bjorn,
> 
> Sorry for the delay in my reponse.
> 
> > > From: Björn Steinbrink <B.Steinbrink@gmx.de>
> > > 
> > > Separate the performance counter reservation system from the nmi
> > > watchdog to allow usage of all performance counters even if the nmi
> > > watchdog is not used.
> > > 
> 
> I think it is a good idea to separate the counter allocator from NMI
> becuase as you said they are/will be use used by more than the NMI
> watchdog. Thus, I think you should drop the stirng nmi from the
> routines. I would also povide a separate header file for this allocator.

Rationale for both: This was already a (IMHO) rather huge patch for such
a bugfix so I didn't want to change even more code for the sake of
cleanup. I had planned to send a second patch for 2.6.23 that would do
the clean up, should have mentioned that (or included the second patch).

Will resend the patch later today, together with the cleanup patch.
Whoever applies it can then decide if the cleanup should go into 2.6.22
or 2.6.23.

Thanks,
Björn
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/