On Monday 13 July 2009, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Mon, 2009-06-22 at 08:58 -0400, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > But talking about syscalls the sys_perf_counter_open prototype is
> > really ugly - it uses either the pid or cpu argument which is a pretty
> > clear indicator it should actually be two sys calls.
>
> Would something like the below be any better?
>
> It would allow us to later add something like PERF_TARGET_SOCKET and
> things like that.
I don't think it helps on the ugliness side. You basically make the
two arguments a union, but instead of adding another flag and directly
passing a union, you also add interface complexity.
A strong indication for the complexity is that you got it wrong ;-) :
> +struct perf_counter_target {
> + __u32 id;
> + __u64 val;
> +};
This structure is not compatible between 32 and 64 bit user space on x86,
because everything except i386 adds implicit padding between id and val.
Other than that, making it extensible sounds reasonable. How about just
using a '__u64 *target' and a bit in the 'flags' argument?
Arnd <><
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Enter the BlackBerry Developer Challenge
This is your chance to win up to $100,000 in prizes! For a limited time,
vendors submitting new applications to BlackBerry App World(TM) will have
the opportunity to enter the BlackBerry Developer Challenge. See full prize
details at: http://p.sf.net/sfu/Challenge
_______________________________________________
perfmon2-devel mailing list
perfmon2-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/perfmon2-devel
