From: Michael Ellerman <michael@ellerman.id.au>
To: Anshuman Khandual <khandual@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc: linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org, mikey@neuling.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] powerpc, perf: Configure BHRB filter before enabling PMU interrupts
Date: Wed, 9 Oct 2013 17:03:23 +1100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20131009060321.GB28160@concordia> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <5254DFA8.2050100@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
On Wed, Oct 09, 2013 at 10:16:32AM +0530, Anshuman Khandual wrote:
> On 10/09/2013 06:51 AM, Michael Ellerman wrote:
> > On Tue, Oct 08, 2013 at 12:51:18PM +0530, Anshuman Khandual wrote:
> >> On 10/08/2013 09:51 AM, Michael Ellerman wrote:
> >>> On Mon, Oct 07, 2013 at 10:00:26AM +0530, Anshuman Khandual wrote:
> >>>> Right now the `config_bhrb` PMU specific call happens after write_mmcr0
> >>>> which actually enables the PMU for event counting and interrupt. So
> >>>> there is a small window of time where the PMU and BHRB runs without the
> >>>> required HW branch filter (if any) enabled in BHRB. This can cause some
> >>>> of the branch samples to be collected through BHRB without any filter
> >>>> being applied and hence affecting the correctness of the results. This
> >>>> patch moves the BHRB config function call before enabling the interrupts.
> >>>
> >>> Patch looks good.
> >>>
> >>> But it reminds me I have an item in my TODO list:
> >>> - "Why can't config_bhrb() be done in compute_mmcr()" ?
> >>>
> >>
> >> compute_mmcr() function deals with generic MMCR* configs for normal PMU
> >> events. Even if BHRB config touches MMCRA register, it's configuration
> >> does not interfere with the PMU config for general events. So its best
> >> to keep them separate.
> >
> > I'm unconvinced. If they'd been together to begin with this bug never
> > would have happened.
>
> This is an ordering of configuration problem. Putting them together in the
> same function does not rule out the chances of this ordering problem. Could
> you please kindly explain how this could have been avoided ?
The existing code already makes sure to write MMCRA before MMCR0.
cheers
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-10-09 6:03 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 14+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-10-07 4:30 [PATCH] powerpc, perf: Configure BHRB filter before enabling PMU interrupts Anshuman Khandual
2013-10-08 4:21 ` Michael Ellerman
2013-10-08 7:21 ` Anshuman Khandual
2013-10-09 1:21 ` Michael Ellerman
2013-10-09 4:46 ` Anshuman Khandual
2013-10-09 6:03 ` Michael Ellerman [this message]
2013-10-10 8:50 ` Anshuman Khandual
2013-10-11 2:11 ` Michael Ellerman
2013-10-11 4:32 ` Anshuman Khandual
2013-10-14 6:19 ` Michael Ellerman
2013-10-16 4:30 ` Anshuman Khandual
2013-12-13 6:46 ` Anshuman Khandual
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2013-12-18 2:14 Michael Ellerman
2013-12-18 3:41 ` Anshuman Khandual
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=20131009060321.GB28160@concordia \
--to=michael@ellerman.id.au \
--cc=khandual@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org \
--cc=mikey@neuling.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox