Re: [RFC 4/5] x86, perf: implements lwp-perf-integration (rc1)

[Ingo Molnar]

* Avi Kivity <avi@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> On 12/21/2011 02:34 PM, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> > I think it can all be supported in a consistent way (see my 
> > previous mails) - but the feature as presented today just 
> > does not look useful enough to me if only supports that 
> > niche self-monitoring usecase.
> 
> I hate to re-enter this thread, but this "niche use case" is 
> exactly what LWP is designed for. [...]

It's not the only usecase that it can be used in, and that is 
what matters to me.

> [...] And once the JVM is adapted to exploit LWP, its use will 
> dwarf all of the uses of perf put together (except the NMI 
> watchdog).  You're only causing the developers needless pain 
> by forcing them to fit this red peg into a green hole.

I disagree - i think LWP has been seriously over-sold and 
seriously under-designed. Anyway, i'm willing to be convinced 
that it's worth to be merged upstream, if it brings tangible 
benefits to the usecases i mentioned.

Thanks,

	Ingo
--
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/