From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756991Ab2FEMHP (ORCPT ); Tue, 5 Jun 2012 08:07:15 -0400 Received: from casper.infradead.org ([85.118.1.10]:44495 "EHLO casper.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756362Ab2FEMHO convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Tue, 5 Jun 2012 08:07:14 -0400 Message-ID: <1338898024.28282.160.camel@twins> Subject: Re: [PATCH] perf: Fix intel shared extra msr allocation From: Peter Zijlstra To: Stephane Eranian Cc: "Yan, Zheng" , "Yan, Zheng" , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Date: Tue, 05 Jun 2012 14:07:04 +0200 In-Reply-To: References: <1338520856-21020-1-git-send-email-zheng.z.yan@intel.com> <1338891271.28282.155.camel@twins> <1338892071.28282.157.camel@twins> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT X-Mailer: Evolution 3.2.2- Mime-Version: 1.0 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, 2012-06-05 at 12:38 +0200, Stephane Eranian wrote: > How about we add a field or flag to cpuc to tell it's fake, and then > in > try_alt_er() and __intel_shared_reg_get_constraints() we avoid > touching > live struct (like reg->alloc) if fake==1. I think he was trying to do > the same with the core_id == -1 test. We might have to do something like that, however I'm trying to figure out when that reg->alloc test in __intel_shared_reg_get_contraints() is useful. If it is useful in event scheduling, we cannot just leave it out in validate_group().