public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "K.Prasad" <prasad@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Cc: Arjan van de Ven <arjan@infradead.org>,
	"Frank Ch. Eigler" <fche@redhat.com>,
	peterz@infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] perf_core: provide a kernel-internal interface to get to performance counters
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 2009 13:46:16 +0530	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20091001081616.GA3636@in.ibm.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20091001072518.GA1502@elte.hu>

On Thu, Oct 01, 2009 at 09:25:18AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> 
> * Arjan van de Ven <arjan@infradead.org> wrote:
> 
> > On Sun, 27 Sep 2009 00:02:46 +0530
> > "K.Prasad" <prasad@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
> > 
> > > On Sat, Sep 26, 2009 at 12:03:28PM -0400, Frank Ch. Eigler wrote:
> > 
> > > > For what it's worth, this sort of thing also looks useful from 
> > > > systemtap's point of view.
> > > 
> > > Wouldn't SystemTap be another user that desires support for 
> > > multiple/all CPU perf-counters (apart from hw-breakpoints as a 
> > > potential user)? As Arjan pointed out, perf's present design would 
> > > support only a per-CPU or per-task counter; not both.
> > 
> > I'm sorry but I think I am missing your point. "all cpu counters" 
> > would be one small helper wrapper away, a helper I'm sure the 
> > SystemTap people are happy to submit as part of their patch series 
> > when they submit SystemTap to the kernel.
> 
> Yes, and Frederic wrote that wrapper already for the hw-breakpoints 
> patches. It's a non-issue and does not affect the design - we can always 
> gang up an array of per cpu perf events, it's a straightforward use of 
> the existing design.
> 

Such a design (iteratively invoking a per-CPU perf event for all desired
CPUs) isn't without issues, some of which are noted here:
(apart from http://lkml.org/lkml/2009/9/14/298).

- It breaks the abstraction that a user of the exported interfaces would
  enjoy w.r.t. having all CPU (or a cpumask of CPU) breakpoints.

- (Un)Availability of debug registers on every requested CPU is not
  known until request for that CPU fails. A failed request should be
  followed by a rollback of the partially successful requests.

- Any breakpoint exceptions generated due to partially successful
  requests (before a failed request is encountered) must be treated as
  'stray' and be ignored (by the end-user? or the wrapper code?).

- Any CPUs that become online eventually have to be trapped and
  populated with the appropriate debug register value (not something
  that the end-user of breakpoints should be bothered with).

- Modifying the characteristics of a kernel breakpoint (including the
  valid CPUs) will be equally painful.

- Races between the requests (also leading to temporary failure of
  all CPU requests) presenting an unclear picture about free debug
  registers (making it difficult to predict the need for a retry).

So we either have a perf event infrastructure that is cognisant of
many/all CPU counters, or make perf as a user of hw-breakpoints layer
which already handles such requests in a deft manner (through appropriate
book-keeping).

Thanks,
K.Prasad


  reply	other threads:[~2009-10-01  8:16 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 30+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2009-09-25 10:25 [RFC PATCH] perf_core: provide a kernel-internal interface to get to performance counters Arjan van de Ven
2009-09-25 10:44 ` Frederic Weisbecker
2009-09-25 11:42 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-09-26 16:03 ` Frank Ch. Eigler
2009-09-26 16:11   ` Arjan van de Ven
2009-09-26 16:20     ` Frank Ch. Eigler
2009-09-26 18:32   ` K.Prasad
2009-09-26 18:48     ` Arjan van de Ven
2009-10-01  7:25       ` Ingo Molnar
2009-10-01  8:16         ` K.Prasad [this message]
2009-10-01  8:53           ` Ingo Molnar
2009-10-01 10:01             ` K.Prasad
2009-10-01 10:28               ` Ingo Molnar
2009-10-04 22:28             ` Frederic Weisbecker
2009-10-05  9:55               ` Ingo Molnar
2009-10-05 10:13                 ` Frédéric Weisbecker
2009-10-05  7:53             ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-10-05  8:55               ` Ingo Molnar
2009-10-05  9:24                 ` Frédéric Weisbecker
2009-10-05  9:48                   ` Ingo Molnar
2009-10-05 10:08                     ` Frédéric Weisbecker
2009-11-21 13:36 ` [tip:perf/core] perf/core: Provide " tip-bot for Arjan van de Ven
2010-02-05 15:47 ` [RFC PATCH] perf_core: provide " Christoph Hellwig
2010-02-05 17:59   ` john smith
2010-02-06  6:24   ` Arjan van de Ven
2010-02-06 11:46     ` Frederic Weisbecker
2010-02-06 14:18       ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-02-06 16:08         ` Frederic Weisbecker
2010-02-07 17:01   ` Ingo Molnar
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2010-01-25  5:10 john smith

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=20091001081616.GA3636@in.ibm.com \
    --to=prasad@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=arjan@infradead.org \
    --cc=fche@redhat.com \
    --cc=fweisbec@gmail.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@elte.hu \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.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