From: Eric B Munson <emunson@mgebm.net>
To: Benjamin Herrenschmidt <benh@kernel.crashing.org>
Cc: a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl, paulus@samba.org, mingo@elte.hu,
acme@ghostprotocols.net, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, anton@samba.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] POWER: perf_event: Skip updating kernel counters if register value shrinks
Date: Tue, 29 Mar 2011 10:25:19 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20110329142519.GA3527@mgebm.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1301378637.2402.671.camel@pasglop>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2077 bytes --]
On Tue, 29 Mar 2011, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
> On Fri, 2011-03-25 at 09:28 -0400, Eric B Munson wrote:
> > It is possible on POWER7 for some perf events to have values decrease. This
> > causes a problem with the way the kernel counters are updated. Deltas are
> > computed and then stored in a 64 bit value while the registers are 32 bits
> > wide so if new value is smaller than previous value, the delta is a very
> > large positive value. As a work around this patch skips updating the kernel
> > counter in when the new value is smaller than the previous. This can lead to
> > a lack of precision in the coutner values, but from my testing the value is
> > typcially fewer than 10 samples at a time.
>
> Unfortunately the patch isn't 100% correct I believe:
>
> I think you don't deal with the rollover of the counters. The new value
> could be smaller than the previous one simply because the counter just
> rolled over.
>
> In cases like this:
>
> > @@ -449,8 +458,10 @@ static void freeze_limited_counters(struct cpu_hw_events *cpuhw,
> > val = (event->hw.idx == 5) ? pmc5 : pmc6;
> > prev = local64_read(&event->hw.prev_count);
> > event->hw.idx = 0;
> > - delta = (val - prev) & 0xfffffffful;
> > - local64_add(delta, &event->count);
> > + if (val >= prev) {
> > + delta = (val - prev) & 0xfffffffful;
> > + local64_add(delta, &event->count);
> > + }
> > }
> > }
>
> I wonder if it isn't easier to just define delta to be a s32, get rid
> of the mask and test if delta is positive, something like:
>
> delta = val - prev;
> if (delta > 0)
> local64_add(delta, &event->count);
>
> Wouldn't that be simpler ? Or do I miss a reason why it wouldn't work ?
Here I made the assumption that the hardware would never remove more events in
a speculative roll back than it had added. This is not a situation I
encoutered in my limited testing, so I didn't think underflow was possible. I
will send out a V2 using the signed 32 bit delta and remeber to CC stable
this time.
Eric
[-- Attachment #2: Digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 490 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-03-29 14:25 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-03-25 13:28 [PATCH] POWER: perf_event: Skip updating kernel counters if register value shrinks Eric B Munson
2011-03-29 6:03 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2011-03-29 14:25 ` Eric B Munson [this message]
2011-03-29 21:12 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2011-03-30 18:36 ` Eric B Munson
2011-03-31 6:04 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2011-03-31 16:14 ` Eric B Munson
2011-04-06 21:27 ` Eric B Munson
2011-04-07 4:22 ` Benjamin Herrenschmidt
2011-04-07 16:16 ` Eric B Munson
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=20110329142519.GA3527@mgebm.net \
--to=emunson@mgebm.net \
--cc=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
--cc=acme@ghostprotocols.net \
--cc=anton@samba.org \
--cc=benh@kernel.crashing.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.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