All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de>
To: Tim Blechmann <tim@klingt.org>
Cc: Robert Richter <robert.richter@amd.com>,
	oprofile-list@lists.sf.net, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: 2.6.29-rc4 regression
Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2009 08:45:40 +0100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1234856740.6867.22.camel@marge.simson.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <499961AF.8030909@klingt.org>

On Mon, 2009-02-16 at 13:53 +0100, Tim Blechmann wrote:
> >>> still, I can not reproduce this with my tests with v2.6.29-rc4. The
> >>> regression on the systems I have runs fine on rc4. On the system you
> >>> have, is commit b99170288421c79f0c2efa8b33e26e65f4bb7fb8 the first bad
> >>> one? If so, I will split the patch into smaller pieces to find the
> >>> change that introduces the bug.
> >> i got revision df13b31c286b3e91c556167954eda088d90a4295 working, by not
> >> resetting the counter width:
> >>
> >> diff --git a/arch/x86/oprofile/op_model_ppro.c b/arch/x86/oprofile/op_model_ppro.c
> >> index 12e207a..f0e019d 100644
> >> --- a/arch/x86/oprofile/op_model_ppro.c
> >> +++ b/arch/x86/oprofile/op_model_ppro.c
> >> @@ -76,12 +76,14 @@ static void ppro_setup_ctrs(struct op_msrs const * const msrs)
> >>  			return;
> >>  	}
> >>  
> >> +#if 0
> >>  	if (cpu_has_arch_perfmon) {
> >>  		union cpuid10_eax eax;
> >>  		eax.full = cpuid_eax(0xa);
> >>  		if (counter_width < eax.split.bit_width)
> >>  			counter_width = eax.split.bit_width;
> >>  	}
> >> +#endif
> >>
> >>
> >> this tweak did not work on later kernels, that i tested, though, and i 
> >> haven't had time to look into it in more detail.
> 
> hm, i just tried to compile 2.6.28 with this patch applied, and there
> the NMIs are delivered correctly.
> 
> > Thanks Tim, on later kernels, is it the behaviour you mentioned that
> > no NMIs are delivered and you do not receive any NMI?
> 
> on the current 2.6.29-rc5, no NMIs are delivered. however i have also
> applied the performance counter branch from tip, maybe that interferes
> with oprofile?

Hm.

If you're using latest tip, there _should_ be no interference.  There
was a problem a short while back in that both perfcounters and oprofile
register die handlers, but that was resolved by increasing oprofile's
handler priority, so that it takes over NMI handling while profiling.

I just did an oprofile test run with x86-tip/master while kerneltop was
running.  NMIs stopped being handled by kerneltop once oprofile started,
and resumed after oprofile finished... seems to be working.

	-Mike 


  reply	other threads:[~2009-02-17  7:45 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 33+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2008-12-21 14:23 2.6.28-rc9: oprofile regression Tim Blechmann
2008-12-21 21:23 ` Tim Blechmann
2008-12-22 12:11   ` Robert Richter
2008-12-26  2:42   ` Andi Kleen
2009-01-02 11:04     ` Tim Blechmann
2009-01-14 17:10       ` Thomas Gleixner
2009-01-14 18:19         ` Tim Blechmann
2009-01-15  8:46           ` Thomas Gleixner
2009-01-15  9:14             ` Tim Blechmann
2009-01-15 20:37               ` Thomas Gleixner
2009-01-16  0:53                 ` Tim Blechmann
2009-01-16  8:59                   ` Thomas Gleixner
2009-01-16 11:29                     ` Tim Blechmann
2009-01-16 15:52                       ` Thomas Gleixner
2009-01-16 16:02                         ` Tim Blechmann
2009-01-17 13:32                     ` Tim Blechmann
2009-01-17 14:14                       ` Robert Richter
2009-01-17 15:09                         ` Tim Blechmann
2009-01-17 15:56                           ` Robert Richter
2009-01-17 16:40                             ` Tim Blechmann
2009-02-11 19:51 ` 2.6.29-rc4 regression (was: Re: 2.6.28-rc9: oprofile regression) Tim Blechmann
2009-02-13 19:07   ` Robert Richter
2009-02-16 10:23     ` Tim Blechmann
2009-02-16 11:33       ` Robert Richter
2009-02-16 12:53         ` 2.6.29-rc4 regression Tim Blechmann
2009-02-17  7:45           ` Mike Galbraith [this message]
2009-02-17 21:56             ` Tim Blechmann
2009-02-18  4:54               ` Mike Galbraith
2009-02-16 11:40       ` 2.6.29-rc4 regression (was: Re: 2.6.28-rc9: oprofile regression) Robert Richter
2009-02-19 16:34         ` [PATCH] oprofile: don't set counter width from cpuid on core2 Tim Blechmann
2009-03-03 10:04           ` Robert Richter
2009-03-03 11:05             ` Ingo Molnar
2009-03-03 11:09             ` [tip:x86/urgent] x86: oprofile: don't set counter width from cpuid on Core2 Tim Blechmann

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=1234856740.6867.22.camel@marge.simson.net \
    --to=efault@gmx.de \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=oprofile-list@lists.sf.net \
    --cc=robert.richter@amd.com \
    --cc=tim@klingt.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.