Hello,

On 05/10/2010 07:20 AM, Paul Mackerras wrote:
quoted text
> Don't forget where perf_events started out - as a way to count and
> record hardware events.  So perf_events is very useful even in a
> kernel that has no tracing infrastructure configured in at all. 

Alright, but I don't think it's very relevant to worry about
!CONFIG_TRACEPOINTS && CONFIG_PERF_EVENTS case as long as both can be
compiled out.  TPs are supposed to have very low to almost no runtime
overhead and building them into the kernel shouldn't cost all that
much either (I hear that it has been improved lately).  Sure, perf can
be used w/o TPs but I can't see what that configurability buys us.

Thanks.

-- 
tejun
--
unsubscribe notice
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/