[Xen-devel] RE: xenpm: provide core/package cstate residencies

[Ian Jackson <Ian.Jackson@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Wei, Gang writes ("[Xen-devel] RE: xenpm: provide core/package cstate 
residencies"):
> On 2010 07 13 01:35, Keir Fraser wrote:
> > I applied the hypervisor component of this patch. I leave it to Ian
> > Jackson to deal with the tools part. In future please split patches
> > that touch both hypervisor and tools into a patch series in which
> > each component patch touches only one or the other.
> 
> Here is the tools part of the previous large patch.

Thanks.

Can I ask why these new performance counters are just named with
numbers (pc3, pc6, pc7, cc3, cc6) ?  Is this normal ?  Should they be
given more expansive names in the output from xenpm ?

Also, I just went and looked at xenpm.c since you were adding a lot of
code to the SIGINT handler, and it seems to me that the code is signal
unsafe.  It calls printf both from the main program and from the
signal handler, and if you hit ^C while it's starting up it will
probably crash in stdio.  This is of course not your fault and not a
reason not to apply your patch.

Also, why loop again over the CPU topology, rather than doing the work
in cpu_topology_func ?

Sorry to ask lots of questions but I'm not very familiar with the
xenpm code and how people use it.

Thanks,
Ian.

_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel