On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 12:55:01PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 11:44:18AM +0100, Mark Rutland wrote: > > 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.
Yes, that too. > New names might clarify things a little though. I'll add that to the list of cleanup/rework I've been meaning to look at. Thanks, Mark.
