Re: Intel ia32e support

[Philippe E. <ph...@wa...>]

On Wed, 25 Feb 2004 at 12:05 +0000, Will Cohen wrote:

> I have been working on oprofile ia32e support. The ia32e performance 
> monitoring hardware is pretty much like the p4. I have a preliminary 
> kernel patch that makes a unique identifiers for the ia32e (x86-64/ia32 
> and x86-64/ia32e-ht) and oprofile recognize the associated identifiers.

Will I applied your patch diff events/x86_64/ia32e/, events/i386/p4/ and
events/x86_64/ia32e-ht/, events/i386/p4-ht/ and there is absolutely
no difference so by "pretty much like the p4" you mean exactly identical
at oprofile point of view (and this is what I got too by reading the
documentation) So do we need to treat ia32e specially ? The only bad point
is the displayed name, I don't really take care about that. I first tough
than adding these two lines in op_cpu_type.c will work

{ "Intel ia32e", "x86-64/ia32e", CPU_P4, 8 },
{ "Intel ia32e with 2 hyper-threads", "x86-64/ia32e-ht", CPU_P4_HT2, 4},

but we use op_get_cpu_type_str() and op_get_cpu_name() by getting
the cpu type from samplefiles header and so we will get the wrong string.
There is solution to fix that in a backward compatible way (i/e use one
of unused field in sample file header, use it to select a sub-processor type)
and we don't need to bump sample file version.

John any feeling about the naming issue ? I'm a bit inclined to call
ia32e(-ht) a P4(-ht) and to do nothing about ia32e but I'm prolly a bit
too lazy ...

In case we want the kernel patch is there any box available to test it ?

regards,
Phil