Re: [PATCH] perf_counter: extensible perf_counter_attr

[Ingo Molnar]

* Paul Mackerras <paulus@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> Peter Zijlstra writes:
> 
> > Allow extending the perf_counter_attr structure by linking extended
> > structures to it.
> 
> ...
> 
> > @@ -175,6 +175,13 @@ struct perf_counter_attr {
> >  	__u32			__reserved_3;
> >  
> >  	__u64			__reserved_4;
> > +
> > +	struct perf_counter_attr_ext *ext_attrs;
> > +};
> 
> Since this is a user-visible structure, you've just introduced an 
> ABI difference between 32-bit and 64-bit processes, which we've 
> managed to avoid so far. [...]

This is a good point too - handling pointers in ABIs is possible but 
should be avoided as much as possible: it creates the need to 
introduce a compat_sys_perf_counter_open() and doubles the syscall 
table complexity.

Lets do the s/__reserved_1/attr_size ABI i suggested (i outlined 
various properties of it in the previous mail). Agreed?

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