RE: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] xenoprof (linux-sparse)

["Santos, Jose Renato G" <joserenato.santos@xxxxxx>]

Ian,

OProfile kernel driver has a generic code component and an architecture
specific code component (one for each of the OProfile supported
architectures). The generic code is located in the directory
"drivers/oprofile"  of the linux tree. The architecture specific code is
located on each architecture subtree (e.g. "arch/i386/oprofile" for x86
and "arch/ia64/oprofile" for ia64). For xen we added a new architecture
specific component (in "arch/xen/oprofile"). We also had to make a few
modifications in the generic code in "drivers/oprofile".

I agree that the modifications to the generic code in "drivers/oprofile"
should not be included in the sparse tree. However, I thought that the
new architecture specific code in "arch/xen/oprofile" could be included
in the sparse tree, since this is xen specific code and does not exist
in the vanila linux tree. That was the reason why I broke the linux
modifications into two patches (xenoprof-2.0-linux-2.6-sparse.patch and
xenoprof-2.0-linux-2.6.12.patch). I am not sure if I understand your
arguments against this option.

The patch for Oprofile user level tools could go to a "tools/oprofile"
directory or something equivalent as you suggested.
I also don't understand why you would prefer to not include the patch
for the generic oprofile code ("drivers/oprofile") in the patches/linux
directory. I don't think they touch any file in the sparse tree as you
said. They only touch files in "drivers/oprofile" and
"include/linux/oprofile.h" which I believe are not in the sparse tree.
Maybe you were thinking about the old version of xenoprof which had all
linux modifications in a single patch.

Please let me know if you think this makes sense. I just wanted to make
sure you understand the xenoprof patches before deciding how to include
them. 

Thanks

Renato


-----Original Message-----
From: xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Ian Pratt
Sent: Friday, November 11, 2005 6:15 PM
To: Santos, Jose Renato G; Keir Fraser
Cc: Turner, Yoshio; Jose Renato Santos; xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; G
John Janakiraman
Subject: RE: [Xen-devel] [PATCH] xenoprof (linux-sparse)

 >   I am sending a revised version of xenoprof including a few 
> minor fixes and changes based on your comments.
>   I was hoping you could push this into the public tree... 
>   I will be sending the 4 patches in 4 different messages.

It don't think it makes sense to apply the linux part of these patches
directly to the sparse tree -- the sparse tree should remain close to
the vanilla base.  

Putting the patch into the patches/linux directory won't work either as
it touches files that are already in the sparse tree: the patch would
need to be reverted before doing checkins. 

What's probably best is if we check the patch into a tools/oprofile
directory along with the user space tools. Have you had any feedback
from the oprofile maintainer?

Thanks,
Ian 

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

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