Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu> writes:
> that having all said, i'm not against a generic, nonpriviledged (kernel
> based) performance counter API within the kernel (if there is demand), and
> such an API should of course have close control over the contents of the
> performance counter registers, and in this case the NMI oopser has to
> cooperate. Something like doing per-process performance monitoring and
> potentially switching the MSRs on task-switch.
regarding perf. counters, there is also the PAPI initiative, standard
*user level* API :
Performance Data Standard and API
http://icl.cs.utk.edu/projects/papi/
Linux 2.2 and 2.4 (CVS) are actively supported with a patch. Probably
PAPI developers would also be glad to have a standard linux kernel API.
d.
-- David.Mentre@irisa.fr -- http://www.irisa.fr/prive/dmentre/ Linux SMP HOWTO: http://www.irisa.fr/prive/dmentre/smp-howto/ Opinions expressed here are only mine. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat Sep 30 2000 - 21:00:24 EST