Hi, I'm working on putting together the minimal patchset for perfmon3 on power, and I'm running into an issue.
With the set of 5 pfm syscalls, the base syscall number of power is 319 for perfmon3. I'm trying to run examples/self and after debugging the app, I found that it is incorrectly detecting the _pfmlib_sys_base as 323. In the full perfmon3 implementation this isn't an issue as the syscall base is found in /sys/kernel/perfmon/syscall and it is correctly returned here. For the minimal perfmon3, it uses the hardcoded values which check the kernel version number (2.6.28 in my case) and then return the appropriate code. Now the question is... if both a minimal perfmon3, a full perfmon3, and a full perfmon2 exist, would using just the kernel version to find a hardcoded value be still ok to do... or would there be another switch I could add that would check for perfmon version. Also, would it make sense to have the perfmon fs syscall entry for a more accurate way to detect the syscall base. Thanks --chris j arges ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/ _______________________________________________ perfmon2-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/perfmon2-devel
