All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: Paul Mundt <lethal@linux-sh.org>
Cc: Matt Fleming <matt@console-pimps.org>,
	Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>, paulus <paulus@samba.org>,
	stephane eranian <eranian@googlemail.com>,
	Robert Richter <robert.richter@amd.com>,
	Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com>,
	Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@gmail.com>,
	Lin Ming <ming.m.lin@intel.com>,
	Yanmin <yanmin_zhang@linux.intel.com>,
	Deng-Cheng Zhu <dengcheng.zhu@gmail.com>,
	David Miller <davem@davemloft.net>,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 00/11] perf pmu interface -v2
Date: Fri, 02 Jul 2010 11:52:03 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1278064323.1917.245.camel@laptop> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20100702025716.GA25499@linux-sh.org>

On Fri, 2010-07-02 at 11:57 +0900, Paul Mundt wrote:
> At the moment it's not an issue since we have big enough counters that
> overflows don't really happen, especially if we're primarily using them
> for one-shot measuring.
> 
> SH-4A style counters behave in such a fashion that we have 2 general
> purpose counters, and 2 counters for measuring bus transactions. These
> bus counters can optionally be disabled and used in a chained mode to
> provide the general purpose counters a 64-bit counter (the actual
> validity in the upper half of the chained counter varies depending on the
> CPUs, but all of them can do at least 48-bits when chained). 

Right, so I was reading some of that code and I couldn't actually find
where you keep consistency between the hardware counter value and the
stored prev_count value.

That is, suppose I'm counting, the hardware starts at 0, hwc->prev_count
= 0 and event->count = 0.

At some point, x we context switch this task away, so we ->disable(),
which disables the counter and updates the values, so at that time
hwc->prev = x and event->count = x, right?

Now suppose we schedule the task back in, so we do ->enable(), then what
happens? sh_pmu_enable() finds an unused index, (disables it for some
reason.. it should already be cleared if its not used, but I guess a few
extra hardware writes dont hurt) and calls sh4a_pmu_enable() on it.

sh4a_pmu_enable() does 3 writes:

  PPC_PMCAT -- does this clear the counter value?
  PPC_CCBR  -- writes the ->config bits
  PPC_CCBR  (adds CCBR_DUC, couldn't this be done in the 
             previous write to this reg?)

Now assuming that enable does indeed clear the hardware counter value,
shouldn't you also set hwc->prev_count to 0 again? Otherwise the next
update will see a massive jump?

Alternatively you could write the hwc->prev_count value back to the
register.

If you eventually want to drop the chained counter support I guess it
would make sense to have sh_perf_event_update() read and clear the
counter so that you're always 0 based and then enforce an update from
the arch tick hander so you never overflow.



  reply	other threads:[~2010-07-02  9:52 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 56+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2010-06-24 14:28 [RFC][PATCH 00/11] perf pmu interface -v2 Peter Zijlstra
2010-06-24 14:28 ` [PATCH 01/11] perf, x86: Fix Nehalem PMU quirk Peter Zijlstra
2010-06-24 14:28 ` [PATCH 02/11] perf: Fix argument of perf_arch_fetch_caller_regs Peter Zijlstra
2010-06-24 14:28 ` [PATCH 03/11] perf, sparc64: Fix maybe_change_configuration() PCR setting Peter Zijlstra
2010-06-24 14:28 ` [RFC][PATCH 04/11] perf: deconstify struct pmu Peter Zijlstra
2010-06-24 14:28 ` [RFC][PATCH 05/11] perf: register pmu implementations Peter Zijlstra
2010-06-28 13:21   ` Frederic Weisbecker
2010-06-28 15:16     ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-06-28 15:29       ` Frederic Weisbecker
2010-07-09  3:08   ` Paul Mackerras
2010-07-09  8:14     ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-06-24 14:28 ` [RFC][PATCH 06/11] perf: Unindent labels Peter Zijlstra
2010-06-24 14:28 ` [RFC][PATCH 07/11] perf: Reduce perf_disable() usage Peter Zijlstra
2010-06-24 14:28 ` [RFC][PATCH 08/11] perf: Per PMU disable Peter Zijlstra
2010-07-09  7:31   ` Paul Mackerras
2010-07-09  8:36     ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-06-24 14:28 ` [RFC][PATCH 09/11] perf: Default PMU ops Peter Zijlstra
2010-06-29 14:49   ` Frederic Weisbecker
2010-06-29 14:57     ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-06-29 15:00       ` Frederic Weisbecker
2010-06-29 14:58   ` Frederic Weisbecker
2010-06-29 14:59     ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-06-29 15:03       ` Frederic Weisbecker
2010-06-29 16:34         ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-06-29 18:07           ` Frederic Weisbecker
2010-06-29 18:09             ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-06-29 18:11               ` Frederic Weisbecker
2010-06-29 18:19                 ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-06-29 18:21                   ` Frederic Weisbecker
2010-06-24 14:28 ` [RFC][PATCH 10/11] perf: Shrink hw_perf_event Peter Zijlstra
2010-06-29 15:06   ` Frederic Weisbecker
2010-06-24 14:28 ` [RFC][PATCH 11/11] perf: Rework the PMU methods Peter Zijlstra
2010-06-29 15:37   ` Frederic Weisbecker
2010-06-29 16:40     ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-06-29 18:09       ` Frederic Weisbecker
2010-06-25 11:11 ` [RFC][PATCH 00/11] perf pmu interface -v2 Will Deacon
2010-06-25 11:16   ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-06-25 14:36     ` Will Deacon
2010-06-25 14:50       ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-07-01 14:36         ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-07-01 15:02           ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-07-01 15:31             ` MattFleming
2010-07-01 15:39               ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-07-01 16:04                 ` Matt Fleming
2010-07-02  2:57                 ` Paul Mundt
2010-07-02  9:52                   ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
2010-07-05 11:14                     ` Paul Mundt
2010-07-08 11:13                 ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-07-08 11:19                   ` Ingo Molnar
2010-07-18 19:37                     ` Matt Fleming
2010-07-02 12:55           ` Will Deacon
2010-06-26 11:22 ` Matt Fleming
2010-06-26 16:22 ` Corey Ashford
2010-06-28 15:13   ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-06-30 17:19     ` Corey Ashford
2010-06-30 18:11       ` Peter Zijlstra

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=1278064323.1917.245.camel@laptop \
    --to=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=davem@davemloft.net \
    --cc=dengcheng.zhu@gmail.com \
    --cc=eranian@googlemail.com \
    --cc=fweisbec@gmail.com \
    --cc=gorcunov@gmail.com \
    --cc=lethal@linux-sh.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=matt@console-pimps.org \
    --cc=ming.m.lin@intel.com \
    --cc=paulus@samba.org \
    --cc=robert.richter@amd.com \
    --cc=will.deacon@arm.com \
    --cc=yanmin_zhang@linux.intel.com \
    /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.