Re: [PATCH 1/1] perf tools: Add missing user space support forconfig1/config2

[Ingo Molnar]

* Vince Weaver <vweaver1@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> On Tue, 26 Apr 2011, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> 
> > The kernel development process is in essence an abstraction engine, and if 
> > you expect something else you'll probably be facing a lot of frustrating 
> > episodes in the future as well where others try to abstract out meaningful 
> > generalizations.
> 
> yes, but you are taking abstraction to the extreme.

Firstly, that claim is a far cry from your original claim:

   ' How do you "generalize" a functionality like writing a value to an auxiliary
     MSR register? '

... so i guess you conceded the point at least partially, without actually 
openly and honestly conceding the point?

Secondly, you are still quite wrong even with your revised opinion. Being able 
to type '-e cycles' and '-e instructions' in perf and get ... cycles and 
instructions counts/events, and the kernel helping that kind of approach is not 
'abstraction to the extreme', it's called 'common sense'.

The fact that perfmon and oprofile works via magic vendor-specific event string 
incantations is one of the many design failures of those projects - not a 
virtue.

Thanks,

	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/