On Fri, Dec 11, 2015 at 07:13:10PM +0200, Alexander Shishkin wrote: > Peter Zijlstra <[email protected]> writes: > > On second thought; we should not inherit the filters at all. > > > > We should always use event->parent (if exists) for filters. Otherwise > > inherited events will get different filters if you change the filter > > after clone. > > But children will have different mappings,
_can_ have. > so the actual filter > configurations will still differ between parents and children. I guess I > could split the filter in two parts: one that's defined by the user and > one that we calculated from vma addresses, that we later program into > hardware. /me confused, isn't that what you already do? In any case, since inherited counters are uncontrollable (they have no filedesc of their own) and you cannot a priory tell what a child will go do, let alone a child of a child. It really makes no sense to have different filters on different parts of the inherited tree. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
