On Wed, Apr 10, 2013 at 2:28 PM, Ingo Molnar <mi...@kernel.org> wrote: > > * Stephane Eranian <eran...@google.com> wrote: > >> On Wed, Apr 10, 2013 at 1:56 PM, Ingo Molnar <mi...@kernel.org> wrote: >> > >> > * Peter Zijlstra <pet...@infradead.org> wrote: >> > >> >> On Wed, 2013-04-10 at 13:49 +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: >> >> >> >> > Hmm.. the 15h old interface bits got merged? I thought I kept telling >> >> > that should be done like the intel uncore stuff since the hardware >> >> > interface wasn't retarded anymore. >> >> >> >> Ah well, that crap seems to have slipped in in Feb when I was still a >> >> near vegetable and not paying much attention. >> >> >> >> /me curses a bit. >> >> >> >> I don't suppose we can deprecate it and remove this stuff? >> > >> > I think we can - if there's a functional replacement. >> > >> Does the existing code expose a type in sysfs? >> If not then you cannot do this transparently, I am afraid >> because the syntax would be different, i.e., not cpu/... > > That could be compatibility-bridged over in tooling? > > I doubt these events are in heavy use. > I agree.
>> I reviewed the code and tested it. But at the time, I thought >> you had agreed on the approach used. > > I did - but PeterZ has a point, so it would be nice if we could improve on > that. > I think it is doable by cloning some of the functions into an amd_unc.c file. -- 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/
