> > Why do you need to replace the whole table? > > > Because I am extending them with one or two events based on cpu > model. That was the easiest way of doing this instead of playing > some kind of malloc+copy trick.
I did malloc and copy. > > > BTW I still think my approach in the v4 Haswell patchkit > > is simpler and didn't rely on hardcoding these events. > > > I don't care about those events. As I found out, they are not even > used by perf because they are all hardcoded and that's what gets > used. I assume they are exposed for reference only. I don't object > to that. But I think the right mechanism would be one where you > can add events at boot time based on CPU model. It could be used > to add the common events as well in the common part of the init > code. Yes that's what I did. I don't think copying everything for everything new is a good approach. -Andi -- a...@linux.intel.com -- Speaking for myself only -- 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/
