Kevin, On Thu, Jun 01, 2006 at 12:21:29PM -0700, Stephane Eranian wrote: > Kevin, > > On Thu, Jun 01, 2006 at 10:52:50AM -0500, Kevin Corry wrote: > > On Wed May 31 2006 9:58 am, Stephane Eranian wrote: > > > On Mon, May 08, 2006 at 10:11:29AM -0500, Kevin Corry wrote: > > > > Right now libpfm has the pfm_find_event_* and pfm_get_event_* APIs. My > > > > initial impression is that we could add APIs along the lines of > > > > pfm_find_event_mask_* and pfm_get_event_mask_*, which would search > > > > within > > > > one specified "parent" event for the specified mask information. And > > > > pfm_dispatch_events() and its input parameters would have to be updated > > > > to account for these event-masks. And obviously if a PMU doesn't have > > > > the > > > > notion of event-masks (like POWER4/5), then it simply doesn't need to > > > > provide any information for these new APIs. Any thoughts? > > > > > > I have been thinking about that new API too. > > > > And while we're talking about libpfm, I have some questions about the > > existing > > APIs. > > > > First, I don't quite understand the purpose of the following APIs: > > pfm_find_event_by_code() > > pfm_find_event_by_code_next() > > pfm_get_event_code()
Some more precisions about pfm_find_event_by_code_next(). I just looked at the man page for it. If you look there it says, that because there can be multiple events with the same code, you need a way to subsequent matches after the first returned by pfm_find_event_by_code(). Events with the same code are not guaranteed to be consecutive in the table. -- -Stephane _______________________________________________ perfmon mailing list [email protected] http://www.hpl.hp.com/hosted/linux/mail-archives/perfmon/
