On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 11:44:18AM +0100, Mark Rutland wrote: > On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 12:37:07PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 11:30:36AM +0200, Jan Glauber wrote: > > > Note: > > > I'm using perf_sw_context in difference to perf_invalid_context > > > (see WARN_ON in perf_pmu_register). Reason is that with > > > perf_invalid_context > > > add() is never called and the counter results are shown as "unsupported" > > > by > > > perf. With perf_sw_context everything works as expected. > > > > What?! All the uncore PMUs use perf_invalid_context. What doesn't work > > for you? > > I think there's general confusion over the use of invalid context. > Perhaps we could clear that up with: > > #define perf_uncore_context perf_invalid_context > > and > > s/perf_hw_context/perf_cpu_hw_context/
What might be missing is the fact that these are _TASK_ contexts. New names might clarify things a little though.
