From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail143.messagelabs.com (mail143.messagelabs.com [216.82.254.35]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6C6CD6B0088 for ; Tue, 24 Nov 2009 02:47:17 -0500 (EST) Date: Tue, 24 Nov 2009 08:47:03 +0100 From: Ingo Molnar Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/5] perf kmem: Add more functions and show more statistics Message-ID: <20091124074703.GB21991@elte.hu> References: <4B0B6E44.6090106@cn.fujitsu.com> <84144f020911232315h7c8b7348u9ad97f585f54a014@mail.gmail.com> <20091124073426.GA21991@elte.hu> <84144f020911232345j75c93ec6mf1fc426262c14eb0@mail.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <84144f020911232345j75c93ec6mf1fc426262c14eb0@mail.gmail.com> Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org To: Pekka Enberg Cc: Arjan van de Ven , Li Zefan , Eduard - Gabriel Munteanu , Peter Zijlstra , Frederic Weisbecker , LKML , "linux-mm@kvack.org" List-ID: * Pekka Enberg wrote: > Hi Ingo, > > On Tue, Nov 24, 2009 at 9:34 AM, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > Certainly we can postpone it, as long as there's rough strategic > > consensus on the way forward. I'd hate to have two overlapping core > > kernel facilities and friction between the groups pursuing them and > > constant distraction from having two targets. > > Sure, like I said, I think "kmem perf" is the way forward. The only > reason we did kmemtrace userspace out-of-tree was because there was no > perf (or ftrace!) at the time and there wasn't much interest in > putting userspace tools in the tree. > > I hope that counts as a "rough strategic consensus" :-) it does :-) Ingo -- To unsubscribe, send a message with 'unsubscribe linux-mm' in the body to majordomo@kvack.org. For more info on Linux MM, see: http://www.linux-mm.org/ . Don't email: email@kvack.org