Re: [PATCH 01/10] perf/x86/intel: Introduce a concept "domain" as the scope of counters

Hi Peter, Is the idea (abstract common topology related codes for perf modules) the right direction? I'm asking because I'm going to submit uncore codes for new platforms. I'm not sure if the new code should base on this series. Could you please share your opinion? If it's the right

Re: [PATCH 01/10] perf/x86/intel: Introduce a concept "domain" as the scope of counters

On 2/20/2019 6:12 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote: On Tue, Feb 19, 2019 at 12:00:02PM -0800, kan.li...@linux.intel.com wrote: It's very useful to abstract several common topology related codes for these modules to reduce the code redundancy. 3 files changed, 96 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)

Re: [PATCH 01/10] perf/x86/intel: Introduce a concept "domain" as the scope of counters

On Tue, Feb 19, 2019 at 12:00:02PM -0800, kan.li...@linux.intel.com wrote: > It's very useful to abstract several common topology related codes for > these modules to reduce the code redundancy. > 3 files changed, 96 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) So you add 100 lines, so we can remove lines when

[PATCH 01/10] perf/x86/intel: Introduce a concept "domain" as the scope of counters

From: Kan Liang Perf supports miscellaneous modules, e.g cstate, RAPL and uncore. The counters of these modules have different scope of effect than core. So these modules maintain their own scope information independently. Actually, the scope of counters among these modules are similar. It's