Re: [perfmon] Re: [PATCH 1/2] Separate the performance counter allocation from the LAPIC NMI watchdog

> Once this is fixed (which is what Bjorn did), then I will agree with you.
> For this, the allocator needs to be able to probe the CPU and initialize
> its own data structures.

Ok that sounds reasonable. Please someone send a patch that does only 
that.

-Andi
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Follow-Ups:
- Re: [perfmon] Re: [PATCH 1/2] Separate the performance counter allocation from the LAPIC NMI watchdog
  - From: Björn Steinbrink <[email protected]>

References:
- Re: [PATCH] Separate performance counter reservation from nmi watchdog
  - From: Björn Steinbrink <[email protected]>
- Re: [PATCH 1/2] Separate the performance counter allocation from the LAPIC NMI watchdog
  - From: Andi Kleen <[email protected]>
- Re: [perfmon] Re: [PATCH 1/2] Separate the performance counter allocation from the LAPIC NMI watchdog
  - From: Stephane Eranian <[email protected]>

Prev by Date: Re: Dual-Licensing Linux Kernel with GPL V2 and GPL V3
Next by Date: Re: [Intel IOMMU 06/10] Avoid memory allocation failures in dma map api calls
Previous by thread: Re: [perfmon] Re: [PATCH 1/2] Separate the performance counter allocation from the LAPIC NMI watchdog
Next by thread: Re: [perfmon] Re: [PATCH 1/2] Separate the performance counter allocation from the LAPIC NMI watchdog
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread

[Index of Archives] [Kernel Newbies] [Netfilter] [Bugtraq] [Photo] [Stuff] [Gimp] [Yosemite News] [MIPS Linux] [ARM Linux] [Linux Security] [Linux RAID] [Video 4 Linux] [Linux for the blind] [Linux Resources]