From: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
To: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@redhat.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>, Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org>,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@redhat.com>,
Stephane Eranian <eranian@google.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] perf cgroups: Fix perf_cgroup_switch schedule in warning
Date: Tue, 02 Oct 2012 13:53:01 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1349178781.7780.29.camel@twins> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20121002114218.GA5891@krava.brq.redhat.com>
On Tue, 2012-10-02 at 13:42 +0200, Jiri Olsa wrote:
> +++ b/kernel/events/core.c
> @@ -394,7 +394,8 @@ void perf_cgroup_switch(struct task_struct *task, int mode)
> }
>
> if (mode & PERF_CGROUP_SWIN) {
> - WARN_ON_ONCE(cpuctx->cgrp);
> + WARN_ON_ONCE(cpuctx->cgrp && !cpuctx->ctx.is_active);
> +
> /* set cgrp before ctxsw in to
> * allow event_filter_match() to not
> * have to pass task around
OK, like you mentioned this is the result of multiple PMU being able to
share a cpuctx, shouldn't we in that case avoid the second loop over the
cpuctx as a whole?
Would something like the below do? IIRC I introduced that active_pmu for
exactly such reasons..
---
kernel/events/core.c | 2 ++
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
diff --git a/kernel/events/core.c b/kernel/events/core.c
index 7b9df35..e98f014 100644
--- a/kernel/events/core.c
+++ b/kernel/events/core.c
@@ -372,6 +372,8 @@ void perf_cgroup_switch(struct task_struct *task, int mode)
list_for_each_entry_rcu(pmu, &pmus, entry) {
cpuctx = this_cpu_ptr(pmu->pmu_cpu_context);
+ if (cpuctx->active_pmu != pmu)
+ continue;
/*
* perf_cgroup_events says at least one
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-10-02 11:53 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-10-02 11:42 [PATCH] perf cgroups: Fix perf_cgroup_switch schedule in warning Jiri Olsa
2012-10-02 11:53 ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
2012-10-02 12:01 ` Stephane Eranian
2012-10-02 12:39 ` Jiri Olsa
2012-10-02 12:48 ` Stephane Eranian
2012-10-02 13:10 ` Peter Zijlstra
2012-10-02 13:34 ` Stephane Eranian
2012-10-02 13:46 ` Peter Zijlstra
2012-10-02 13:46 ` Peter Zijlstra
2012-10-02 14:18 ` Stephane Eranian
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2012-10-02 11:18 Jiri Olsa
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=1349178781.7780.29.camel@twins \
--to=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
--cc=acme@redhat.com \
--cc=eranian@google.com \
--cc=fweisbec@gmail.com \
--cc=jolsa@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=paulus@samba.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.