From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757596Ab3A1Rho (ORCPT ); Mon, 28 Jan 2013 12:37:44 -0500 Received: from one.firstfloor.org ([213.235.205.2]:54617 "EHLO one.firstfloor.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1757180Ab3A1Rhk (ORCPT ); Mon, 28 Jan 2013 12:37:40 -0500 Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2013 18:37:36 +0100 From: Andi Kleen To: Stephane Eranian Cc: Andi Kleen , Ingo Molnar , LKML , Peter Zijlstra , Andrew Morton , Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo , Jiri Olsa , Namhyung Kim , Andi Kleen Subject: Re: [PATCH 04/12] perf, x86: Support the TSX intx/intx_cp qualifiers v2 Message-ID: <20130128173736.GT30577@one.firstfloor.org> References: <1359151245-13179-1-git-send-email-andi@firstfloor.org> <1359151245-13179-5-git-send-email-andi@firstfloor.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.2i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > This silently drops intx=1 for unhalted_ref_cycles. This event > only works on fixed counter. So I am wondering what I am measuring > here. In general, I don't like when settings are silently dropped because > the user will be misled into thinking the modifier was applied when in > fact it was not. Ok. I can look at it later, but I don't think it's a show stopper. Error handling in general was never a strength of perf. -Andi