Re: [GIT PULL] perf update
From: Ingo Molnar
Date: Thu Jun 09 2011 - 07:43:28 EST
* Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> * Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > On Tue, 2011-06-07 at 16:56 +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> >
> > > Frederic Weisbecker (1):
> > > perf: Split up buffer handling from core code
> > >
> > >
> > > kernel/events/Makefile | 2 +-
> > > kernel/events/buffer.c | 400 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > > kernel/events/core.c | 458 ++--------------------------------------------
> > > kernel/events/internal.h | 70 +++++++
> > > 4 files changed, 487 insertions(+), 443 deletions(-)
> >
> > Looks about right.
> >
> > Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@xxxxxxxxx>
>
> thanks, i'll pull it it and test it.
Note, i ended up applying it by hand:
- fixed a build error,
- streamlined the renaming: we really want this to be ring_buffer.c
(most of the complexity comes from this not being a simple buffer
but a ring-buffer)
- i streamlined the naming around it: struct ring_buffer
internalized via internal.h (it does not clash with ftrace's
ring-buffer)
It all looks and reads much nicer now, but please double check the
commit as well :-)
One other rename i'd like to do is:
struct perf_output_handle => struct rb_handle
perf_output_begin() => rb_open()
perf_output_copy() => rb_write()
perf_output_sample() => rb_write_sample()
perf_output_end() => rb_close()
Which really makes it a lot more apparent that it's a regular
input/output flow defined over the ring-buffer!
I can do this if this is fine with everyone. There will be no change
in functionality.
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/