From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Andi Kleen Subject: Re: [patch] Performance Counters for Linux, v2 Date: Mon, 08 Dec 2008 15:41:57 +0100 Message-ID: <87k5aan2yy.fsf@basil.nowhere.org> References: <20081208012211.GA23106@elte.hu> <18748.37739.383961.318233@drongo.ozlabs.ibm.com> <20081208113318.GA14723@elte.hu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Received: from one.firstfloor.org ([213.235.205.2]:34762 "EHLO one.firstfloor.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752490AbYLHOlq (ORCPT ); Mon, 8 Dec 2008 09:41:46 -0500 In-Reply-To: <20081208113318.GA14723@elte.hu> (Ingo Molnar's message of "Mon, 8 Dec 2008 12:33:18 +0100") Sender: linux-arch-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Ingo Molnar Cc: Paul Mackerras , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Thomas Gleixner , linux-arch@vger.kernel.org, Andrew Morton , Stephane Eranian , Eric Dumazet , Robert Richter , Arjan van de Veen , Peter Anvin , Peter Zijlstra , Steven Rostedt , David Miller Ingo Molnar writes: > This means that the only correct technical/mathematical argument is to > talk about "levels of noise" and how they compare and correlate - and > i've seen no actual measurements or estimations pro or contra. Group > readout of counters can reduce noise for sure, but it is wrong for you to > try to turn this into some sort of all-or-nothing property. Other sources > of noise tend to be of much higher of magnitude. Ingo, could you please describe how PEBS and IBS fit into your model? Thanks. -Andi -- ak@linux.intel.com