Re: [PATCH V5 1/1] bpf: control events stored in PERF_EVENT_ARRAY maps trace data output when perf sampling

[Peter Zijlstra]

On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 02:19:49PM -0700, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:

> >Urgh, that's still horridly inconsistent. Can we please come up with a
> >consistent interface to perf?

> My suggestion was to do ioctl(enable/disable) of events from userspace
> after receiving notification from kernel via my bpf_perf_event_output()
> helper.

> Wangnan's argument was that display refresh happens often and it's fast,
> so the time taken by user space to enable events on all cpus is too
> slow and ioctl does ipi and disturbs other cpus even more.
> So soft_disable done by the program to enable/disable particular events
> on all cpus kinda makes sense.

And this all makes me think I still have no clue what you're all trying
to do here.

Who cares about display updates and why. And why should there be an
active userspace part to eBPF programs?
--
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/