All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@gmail.com>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Cc: Lin Ming <ming.m.lin@intel.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86,perf: Unmask LVTPC only if we have APIC supported
Date: Sat, 13 Mar 2010 15:32:56 +0300	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100313123256.GC5179@lenovo> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20100313122432.GA10810@elte.hu>

On Sat, Mar 13, 2010 at 01:24:32PM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> 
> * Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@openvz.org> wrote:
> 
> > Ingo reported
> > |
> > | There's a build failure on -tip with the P4 driver, on UP 32-bit, if
> > | PERF_EVENTS is enabled but UP_APIC is disabled:
> > |
> > | arch/x86/built-in.o: In function `p4_pmu_handle_irq':
> > | perf_event.c:(.text+0xa756): undefined reference to `apic'
> > | perf_event.c:(.text+0xa76e): undefined reference to `apic'
> > |
> > 
> > So we have to unmask LVTPC only if we're configured to have one.
> > 
> > Reported-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
> > CC: Lin Ming <ming.m.lin@intel.com>
> > CC: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
> > Signed-off-by: Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@openvz.org>
> > ---
> >  arch/x86/kernel/cpu/perf_event_p4.c |    2 ++
> >  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
> > 
> > Index: linux-2.6.git/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/perf_event_p4.c
> > =====================================================================
> > --- linux-2.6.git.orig/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/perf_event_p4.c
> > +++ linux-2.6.git/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/perf_event_p4.c
> > @@ -365,8 +365,10 @@ static int p4_pmu_handle_irq(struct pt_r
> >  	}
> >  
> >  	if (handled) {
> > +#ifdef CONFIG_X86_LOCAL_APIC
> >  		/* p4 quirk: unmask it again */
> >  		apic_write(APIC_LVTPC, apic_read(APIC_LVTPC) & ~APIC_LVT_MASKED);
> > +#endif
> >  		inc_irq_stat(apic_perf_irqs);
> 
> This ugly #ifdef looks like a workaround though. Why doesnt apic_write() map 
> to nothing in that case?
> 
> 	Ingo
> 

It is. I mean -- it maps to nothing if apic is disabled. But the scenario is
that no apic configured at all. Actually I wonder how this code is supposed to
work without apic support.

Pehpaps better to make a p4 quirk helper here, since #ifdef at this point looks
ugly indeed.

Don't apply it then. Will back with other solution.

	-- Cyrill

  reply	other threads:[~2010-03-13 12:33 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2010-03-13  8:11 [PATCH] x86,perf: Unmask LVTPC only if we have APIC supported Cyrill Gorcunov
2010-03-13 12:24 ` Ingo Molnar
2010-03-13 12:32   ` Cyrill Gorcunov [this message]
2010-03-13 12:40     ` Ingo Molnar
2010-03-13 12:42       ` Ingo Molnar
2010-03-13 13:42       ` Cyrill Gorcunov
2010-03-13 13:50         ` Ingo Molnar
2010-03-13 14:08           ` Cyrill Gorcunov
2010-03-13 15:03           ` Cyrill Gorcunov
2010-03-13 16:21 ` [tip:perf/core] x86, perf: " tip-bot for Cyrill Gorcunov

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=20100313123256.GC5179@lenovo \
    --to=gorcunov@gmail.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=ming.m.lin@intel.com \
    --cc=mingo@elte.hu \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.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.