All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: Vince Weaver <vincent.weaver@maine.edu>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Stephane Eranian <eranian@google.com>,
	Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@kernel.org>,
	Jiri Olsa <jolsa@redhat.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
	Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org>
Subject: Re: perf: odd event scheduling issue
Date: Wed, 20 May 2015 18:28:11 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150520162811.GN18673@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20150520160802.GL18673@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>

On Wed, May 20, 2015 at 06:08:02PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> @@ -2062,6 +2081,22 @@ intel_get_excl_constraints(struct cpu_hw_events *cpuc, struct perf_event *event,
>  	 */
>  
>  	/*
> +	 * Do not allow scheduling of more than max_alloc_cntrs
> +	 * which is set to half the available generic counters.
> +	 *
> +	 * This helps avoid counter starvation of sibling thread
> +	 * by ensuring at most half the counters cannot be in
> +	 * exclusive mode. There is not designated counters for the
> +	 * limits. Any N/2 counters can be used. This helps with
> +	 * events with specifix counter constraints
> +	 */
> +	if (xl->num_alloc_cntrs++ >= xl->max_alloc_cntrs) {
> +		/* wipe the GP counters */
> +		cx->idxmsk64 &= ~((1ULL << INTEL_PMC_IDX_FIXED) - 1);
> +		goto done;
> +	}
> +
> +	/*
>  	 * Modify static constraint with current dynamic
>  	 * state of thread
>  	 *

While this improves things, its still sub optimal because we should only
increase num_alloc_cntrs when we actually allocate a GP register, but we
do that at commit time and that callback is too late to back out / retry.

So ideally we'd move the callback into scheduling code, but that means
we also have to move the xlo array into the sched_state etc.

[ which brings me to the whole xl vs xlo thing, I think we done that the
  wrong way around. It would be more natural to account to xl and create
  constraints based on xlo. ]

Secondly, we should only enforce this limit if and when there are
exclusive events on the system I suppose.

I have some ideas on how to go do this, but I need a break..


  reply	other threads:[~2015-05-20 16:28 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2015-05-20  3:07 perf: odd event scheduling issue Vince Weaver
2015-05-20  7:00 ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-05-20  7:11   ` Jiri Olsa
2015-05-20  9:28   ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-05-20 13:52     ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-05-20 15:25       ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-05-20 16:08         ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-05-20 16:28           ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
2015-05-20 23:10             ` Andi Kleen
2015-05-21 12:04               ` Stephane Eranian
2015-05-20 16:25       ` Jiri Olsa
2015-05-21 12:05         ` Stephane Eranian

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=20150520162811.GN18673@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net \
    --to=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=acme@kernel.org \
    --cc=eranian@google.com \
    --cc=jolsa@redhat.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@redhat.com \
    --cc=paulus@samba.org \
    --cc=vincent.weaver@maine.edu \
    /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.