From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
To: Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@gmail.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Stephane Eranian <eranian@google.com>,
Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com>,
Don Zickus <dzickus@redhat.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC perf,x86] P4 PMU early draft
Date: Tue, 9 Feb 2010 05:17:39 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20100209041739.GA11280@elte.hu> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20100208184504.GB5130@lenovo>
* Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> first of all the patches are NOT for any kind of inclusion. It's not ready
> yet. More likely I'm asking for glance review, ideas, criticism.
A quick question: does the code produce something on a real P4? (possibly
only running with a single event - but even that would be enough.)
> The main problem in implementing P4 PMU is that it has much more
> restrictions for event to MSR mapping. [...]
One possibly simpler approach might be to represent the P4 PMU via a maximum
_two_ generic events only.
Last i looked at the many P4 events, i've noticed that generally you can
create any two events. (with a few exceptions) Once you start trying to take
advantage of the more than a dozen seemingly separate counters, additional
non-trivial constraints apply.
So if we only allowed a maximum of _two_ generic events (like say a simple
Core2 has, so it's not a big restriction at all), we wouldnt have to map all
the constraints, we'd only have to encode the specific event-to-MSR details.
(which alone is quite a bit of work as well.)
We could also use the new constraints code to map them all, of course - it
will certainly be more complex to implement.
Hm?
Ingo
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-02-09 4:17 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-02-08 18:45 [RFC perf,x86] P4 PMU early draft Cyrill Gorcunov
2010-02-08 21:56 ` Cyrill Gorcunov
2010-02-09 4:17 ` Ingo Molnar [this message]
2010-02-09 6:54 ` Cyrill Gorcunov
2010-02-09 22:39 ` Cyrill Gorcunov
2010-02-10 10:12 ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-02-10 10:38 ` Cyrill Gorcunov
2010-02-10 10:52 ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-02-10 11:23 ` Cyrill Gorcunov
2010-02-11 12:21 ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-02-11 15:22 ` Cyrill Gorcunov
2010-02-26 10:25 ` [tip:perf/core] perf_events: Simplify code by removing cpu argument to hw_perf_group_sched_in() tip-bot for Peter Zijlstra
2010-02-09 4:23 ` [RFC perf,x86] P4 PMU early draft Paul Mackerras
2010-02-09 6:57 ` Cyrill Gorcunov
2010-02-09 8:54 ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-02-09 21:13 ` Stephane Eranian
2010-02-09 21:35 ` Cyrill Gorcunov
2010-02-15 20:11 ` Robert Richter
2010-02-15 20:32 ` Cyrill Gorcunov
2010-02-17 22:14 ` Cyrill Gorcunov
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=20100209041739.GA11280@elte.hu \
--to=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=dzickus@redhat.com \
--cc=eranian@google.com \
--cc=fweisbec@gmail.com \
--cc=gorcunov@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--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