From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: Ian Rogers <irogers@google.com>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@kernel.org>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com>,
Jiri Olsa <jolsa@redhat.com>, Namhyung Kim <namhyung@kernel.org>,
Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com>,
Kan Liang <kan.liang@linux.intel.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Stephane Eranian <eranian@google.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] perf test x86: address multiplexing in rdpmc test
Date: Sun, 22 Mar 2020 09:35:44 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200322083544.GE2452@worktop.programming.kicks-ass.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAP-5=fXcHrh=uHmPj43=xYnikx0mHRWFQwMJa1q8yQ=opvSEDA@mail.gmail.com>
On Sat, Mar 21, 2020 at 10:44:49AM -0700, Ian Rogers wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 21, 2020 at 6:41 AM Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> wrote:
> >
> > On Fri, Mar 20, 2020 at 05:14:00PM -0700, Ian Rogers wrote:
> > > Counters may be being used for pinned or other events which inhibit the
> > > instruction counter in the test from being scheduled - time_enabled > 0
> > > but time_running == 0. This causes the test to fail with division by 0.
> > > Add a sleep loop to ensure that the counter is run before computing
> > > the count.
> > > +
> > > + if (running == 0) {
> >
> > This is not in fact the condition the Changelog calls out.
>
> Not sure I follow. As in the multiplexing? It is exactly the condition
> that time_running == 0.
I meant the condition should be 'enabled && !running'.
prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-03-22 9:12 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-03-21 0:14 [PATCH] perf test x86: address multiplexing in rdpmc test Ian Rogers
2020-03-21 13:40 ` Peter Zijlstra
2020-03-21 17:44 ` Ian Rogers
2020-03-22 8:35 ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
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=20200322083544.GE2452@worktop.programming.kicks-ass.net \
--to=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=acme@kernel.org \
--cc=ak@linux.intel.com \
--cc=alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com \
--cc=eranian@google.com \
--cc=irogers@google.com \
--cc=jolsa@redhat.com \
--cc=kan.liang@linux.intel.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=namhyung@kernel.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.