On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 02:19:49PM -0700, Alexei Starovoitov wrote: > >Urgh, that's still horridly inconsistent. Can we please come up with a > >consistent interface to perf?
> My suggestion was to do ioctl(enable/disable) of events from userspace > after receiving notification from kernel via my bpf_perf_event_output() > helper. > Wangnan's argument was that display refresh happens often and it's fast, > so the time taken by user space to enable events on all cpus is too > slow and ioctl does ipi and disturbs other cpus even more. > So soft_disable done by the program to enable/disable particular events > on all cpus kinda makes sense. And this all makes me think I still have no clue what you're all trying to do here. Who cares about display updates and why. And why should there be an active userspace part to eBPF programs? -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
