Re: [PATCH 2/2] perf, x86: Use INTEL_FLAGS_UEVENT_CONSTRAINT for PRECDIST

[Thomas Gleixner]

On Wed, 10 Sep 2014, Andi Kleen wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 10, 2014 at 09:59:26AM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Tue, Sep 09, 2014 at 05:49:08PM -0700, Andi Kleen wrote:
> > > From: Andi Kleen <ak@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > 
> > > The earlier commit 86a04461a made near all PEBS on
> > > Sandy/IvyBridge/Haswell to reject non zero flags.
> > 
> > What's magic about nehalem and westmere?
> 
> I wasn't able to confirm their behavior explicitly, so I felt
> it best to leave them alone.
> 
> But in principle adding the _FLAGS changes there too would
> make sense too.

Can you please once in a while come up with a precise answer to a
question instead of wrapping your internal knowledge into "in
principle", "would" and other magic keywords?

Thanks

	tglx
--
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/