Re: [Perfctr-devel] Re: [perfmon] perfmon2 code review: 32-bit ABI on 64-bit OS
- From: Eric Gouriou <eric.gouriou@xxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 12 Feb 2006 16:03:44 -0800
David Gibson wrote:
On Sat, Feb 11, 2006 at 02:33:54PM -0800, Stephane Eranian wrote:[...]
The most challenging piece is the IP (program pointer) that is in every
sample. Today it is defined as unsigned long because this is fairly
natural for a code address. The 64bit OS captures addresses as 64-bit,
the 32-bit monitoring tool running on top has to consume them as 64-bit
addresses, so u64 would be fine.
But not on a 32-bit kernel with a 32-bit tool, addresses exported as u64
would certainly work but consume double to buffer space, and that is a
more serious issue in my mind.
Hmm.. does the sampling buffer collect on userspace PC values, or
kernel ones as well?
Either, or both, depending on the measurement settings.
I live in a 64-bit world, so my take on this issue would be to expose
the PC as a uint64_t, always. There is already so much overhead in the
default per-sample header that I wouldn't worry about it.
Now 64 bit might not always be enough. E.g., on PA-RISC. But _I_ do
not care much about Linux on PA.
Eric
--
Eric Gouriou eric.gouriou@xxxxxx
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: [perfmon] perfmon2 code review: 32-bit ABI on 64-bit OS
- From: Stephane Eranian
- Re: [perfmon] perfmon2 code review: 32-bit ABI on 64-bit OS
- References:
- perfmon2 code review: 32-bit ABI on 64-bit OS
- From: Stephane Eranian
- Re: perfmon2 code review: 32-bit ABI on 64-bit OS
- From: Bryan O'Sullivan
- Re: [perfmon] perfmon2 code review: 32-bit ABI on 64-bit OS
- From: Stephane Eranian
- Re: [Perfctr-devel] Re: [perfmon] perfmon2 code review: 32-bit ABI on 64-bit OS
- From: David Gibson
- perfmon2 code review: 32-bit ABI on 64-bit OS
- Prev by Date: Re: How getting a pointer on the per-cpu struct tss_struct??
- Next by Date: Re: max symlink = 5? ?bug? ?feature deficit?
- Previous by thread: Re: [Perfctr-devel] Re: [perfmon] perfmon2 code review: 32-bit ABI on 64-bit OS
- Next by thread: Re: [perfmon] perfmon2 code review: 32-bit ABI on 64-bit OS
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|