lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2020]   [Aug]   [13]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH v2 0/4] Perf tool: Enable Arm arch timer counter and arm-spe's timestamp
[ Adding John, as I only just realised he wasn't on CC and we were talking
about him! ]

On Thu, Aug 13, 2020 at 10:59:01AM +0100, Will Deacon wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 12, 2020 at 03:53:34PM -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
> > Em Wed, Aug 12, 2020 at 10:06:53AM -0600, Mathieu Poirier escreveu:
> > > The ARM SPE perf tools code is orphan and I don't have the cycles to
> > > pick it up. Leo has spent a lot of time in that code and as such I
> > > suggest that he starts maintaining it, probably following the same
> > > kind of arrangement you and I have for coresight.
> >
> > Thats ok with me, I think we should reflect that on the MAINTAINERS
> > file, right?
> >
> > We have this already:
> >
> > PERFORMANCE EVENTS SUBSYSTEM ARM64 PMU EVENTS
> > R: John Garry <john.garry@huawei.com>
> > R: Will Deacon <will@kernel.org>
> > L: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org (moderated for non-subscribers)
> > S: Supported
> > F: tools/perf/pmu-events/arch/arm64/
> >
> > I think we should have entries for CoreSight and ARM SPE, one listing
> > you as the maintainer and the other listing Leo, right?
>
> Fine by me. I'll continue to maintain the in-kernel SPE driver, but I'd love
> to see somebody step up to looking after the userspace code. It's seriously
> unloved on arm64 :(
>
> I'd even be happy to see one or two M: entries added for
> tools/perf/pmu-events/arch/arm64/. I realistically don't have the time to
> take that on, but I'd be thrilled if any/all of John, Mathieu and Leo were
> to be listed there if they are willing to do so and can spare the time to
> look after it. Even just silly things like making sure the thing
> cross-compiles have been broken in the recent past, so it's not necessarily
> about handling huge amounts of incoming patches.
>
> In other words, rather than slice up the arm64 parts of the perf tool, I'd
> argue in favour of a joint maintainership model for all the arm64 bits, if
> we have a few willing volunteers.
>
> Will

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2020-08-13 13:19    [W:0.222 / U:0.040 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site