[Cbe-oss-dev] [RFC, PATCH] CELL Oprofile SPU profiling updated patch
Maynard Johnson
maynardj at us.ibm.com
Sat Feb 17 08:43:31 EST 2007
Arnd Bergmann wrote:
> On Friday 16 February 2007 01:32, Maynard Johnson wrote:
>
>>config OPROFILE_CELL
>> bool "OProfile for Cell Broadband Engine"
>> depends on OPROFILE && SPU_FS
>> default y if ((SPU_FS = y && OPROFILE = y) || (SPU_FS = m &&
>>OPROFILE = m))
>> help
>> Profiling of Cell BE SPUs requires special support enabled
>> by this option. Both SPU_FS and OPROFILE options must be
>> set 'y' or both be set 'm'.
>>=============
>>
>>Can anyone see a problem with any of this . . . or perhaps a suggestion
>>of a better way?
>
>
> The text suggests it doesn't allow SPU_FS=y with OPROFILE=m, which I think
> should be allowed.
Right, good catch. I'll add another OR to the 'default y' and correct
the text.
> I also don't see any place in the code where you actually
> use CONFIG_OPROFILE_CELL.
As I mentioned, I will use CONFIG_OPROFILE_CELL in the
arch/powerpc/oprofile/Makefile as follows:
oprofile-$(CONFIG_OPROFILE_CELL) += op_model_cell.o \
cell/spu_profiler.o cell/vma_map.o cell/spu_task_sync.o
>
> Ideally, you should be able to have an oprofile_spu module that can be
> loaded after spufs.ko and oprofile.ko. In that case you only need
>
> config OPROFILE_SPU
> depends on OPROFILE && SPU_FS
> default y
>
> and it will automatically build oprofile_spu as a module if one of the two
> is a module and won't build it if one of them is disabled.
Hmmm . . . I guess that would entail splitting out the SPU-related stuff
from op_model_cell.c into a new file. Maybe more -- that's just what
comes to mind right now. Could be very tricky, and I wonder if it's
worth the bother.
>
> Arnd <><
More information about the Linuxppc-dev
mailing list