From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: alankao@andestech.com (Alan Kao)
Date: Mon, 2 Apr 2018 16:18:06 +0800
Subject: [PATCH 1/2] perf: riscv: preliminary RISC-V support
In-Reply-To: <20180402073611.GA7694@andestech.com>
References: <1522051075-6442-1-git-send-email-alankao@andestech.com>
 <1522051075-6442-2-git-send-email-alankao@andestech.com>
 <CAJ2AOiNQuMJoPZPxy2CDFD0vnxk8E+N-8xiir2nPYKjWJKxshQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <20180329023024.GA32659@andestech.com>
 <CAJ2AOiPNquo1hGrYjsDcCM4st5Exa7x_-xUV=QW_MCBVCCCkBw@mail.gmail.com>
 <20180402073611.GA7694@andestech.com>
Message-ID: <20180402081806.GA24954@andestech.com>
To: linux-riscv@lists.infradead.org
List-Id: linux-riscv.lists.infradead.org


Hi Alex,
 
On Mon, Apr 02, 2018 at 03:36:12PM +0800, Alan Kao wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 31, 2018 at 03:47:10PM -0700, Alex Solomatnikov wrote:
> 
> The original guess was that maybe, an counter value on a hart is picked
> as the minusend, and an old counter value on another hart was recorded
> as the subtrahend but numerically larger.  Then, the overflow causes 
> by that subtraction.  Please let me name this guess as 
> "cross-hart subtraction."
>
> > You can add a skew between cores in qemu, something like this:
> > 
> > case CSR_INSTRET:
> >         core_id()*return cpu_get_host_ticks()/10;
> >     break;
> > case CSR_CYCLE:
> >         return cpu_get_host_ticks();
> >     break;
> > 
> 
> However, I tried similar stuff to reproduce the phenomenon but in vain.
> It seems that the 
>
>               ***cross-hart subtration doesn't even happen, because generic
> code handles them.  ...

I am sorry that this observation is wrong.  With appropriate tweak, we
successfully reproduce the behavior and locate the the bug.

This will be fix in v2.


Thanks for the helps.
Alan