On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 8:37 PM, Stephane Eranian <eran...@google.com> wrote: > On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 7:50 PM, Andi Kleen <a...@linux.intel.com> wrote: >> On Tue, Nov 06, 2012 at 03:29:01PM +0100, Stephane Eranian wrote: >>> On Tue, Nov 6, 2012 at 2:31 PM, Andi Kleen <a...@linux.intel.com> wrote: >>> >> +EVENT_ATTR(cpu-cycles, CPU_CYCLES ); >>> >> +EVENT_ATTR(instructions, INSTRUCTIONS ); >>> >> +EVENT_ATTR(cache-references, CACHE_REFERENCES ); >>> >> +EVENT_ATTR(cache-misses, CACHE_MISSES ); >>> >> +EVENT_ATTR(branch-instructions, BRANCH_INSTRUCTIONS ); >>> >> +EVENT_ATTR(branch-misses, BRANCH_MISSES ); >>> >> +EVENT_ATTR(bus-cycles, BUS_CYCLES ); >>> >> +EVENT_ATTR(stalled-cycles-frontend, STALLED_CYCLES_FRONTEND ); >>> >> +EVENT_ATTR(stalled-cycles-backend, STALLED_CYCLES_BACKEND ); >>> >> +EVENT_ATTR(ref-cycles, REF_CPU_CYCLES ); >>> > >>> > The merge_events() approach from the Haswell patches should be far cleaner >>> >
>>> And which patch in your HSW series implements this? >> >> [PATCH 27/32] perf, x86: Support CPU specific sysfs events >> Ok, integrated that patch in my series and changed my code to use it. It works. -- 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/
