From: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
To: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@redhat.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>, Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org>,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@redhat.com>,
Stephane Eranian <eranian@google.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] perf cgroups: Fix perf_cgroup_switch schedule in warning
Date: Tue, 02 Oct 2012 13:53:01 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1349178781.7780.29.camel@twins> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20121002114218.GA5891@krava.brq.redhat.com>
On Tue, 2012-10-02 at 13:42 +0200, Jiri Olsa wrote:
> +++ b/kernel/events/core.c
> @@ -394,7 +394,8 @@ void perf_cgroup_switch(struct task_struct *task, int mode)
> }
>
> if (mode & PERF_CGROUP_SWIN) {
> - WARN_ON_ONCE(cpuctx->cgrp);
> + WARN_ON_ONCE(cpuctx->cgrp && !cpuctx->ctx.is_active);
> +
> /* set cgrp before ctxsw in to
> * allow event_filter_match() to not
> * have to pass task around
OK, like you mentioned this is the result of multiple PMU being able to
share a cpuctx, shouldn't we in that case avoid the second loop over the
cpuctx as a whole?
Would something like the below do? IIRC I introduced that active_pmu for
exactly such reasons..
---
kernel/events/core.c | 2 ++
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
diff --git a/kernel/events/core.c b/kernel/events/core.c
index 7b9df35..e98f014 100644
--- a/kernel/events/core.c
+++ b/kernel/events/core.c
@@ -372,6 +372,8 @@ void perf_cgroup_switch(struct task_struct *task, int mode)
list_for_each_entry_rcu(pmu, &pmus, entry) {
cpuctx = this_cpu_ptr(pmu->pmu_cpu_context);
+ if (cpuctx->active_pmu != pmu)
+ continue;
/*
* perf_cgroup_events says at least one
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-10-02 11:53 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-10-02 11:42 [PATCH] perf cgroups: Fix perf_cgroup_switch schedule in warning Jiri Olsa
2012-10-02 11:53 ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
2012-10-02 12:01 ` Stephane Eranian
2012-10-02 12:39 ` Jiri Olsa
2012-10-02 12:48 ` Stephane Eranian
2012-10-02 13:10 ` Peter Zijlstra
2012-10-02 13:34 ` Stephane Eranian
2012-10-02 13:46 ` Peter Zijlstra
2012-10-02 13:46 ` Peter Zijlstra
2012-10-02 14:18 ` Stephane Eranian
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2012-10-02 11:18 Jiri Olsa
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=1349178781.7780.29.camel@twins \
--to=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
--cc=acme@redhat.com \
--cc=eranian@google.com \
--cc=fweisbec@gmail.com \
--cc=jolsa@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=paulus@samba.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