public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: "Yan, Zheng" <zheng.z.yan@intel.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, eranian@google.com, andi@firstfloor.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 0/7] perf, x86: Reduce lbr_sel_map size
Date: Fri, 4 Oct 2013 12:55:35 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20131004105535.GH3081@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1380184093-8838-1-git-send-email-zheng.z.yan@intel.com>

On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 04:28:06PM +0800, Yan, Zheng wrote:
> From: "Yan, Zheng" <zheng.z.yan@intel.com>
> 
> Haswell has a new feature that utilizes the existing Last Branch Record
> facility to record call chains. When the feature is enabled, function
> call will be collected as normal, but as return instructions are executed
> the last captured branch record is popped from the on-chip LBR registers.
> The LBR call stack facility can help perf to get call chains of progam 
> without frame pointer. When perf tool requests PERF_SAMPLE_CALLCHAIN +
> PERF_SAMPLE_BRANCH_USER, this feature is dynamically enabled by default.
> This feature can be disabled/enabled through an attribute file in the cpu
> pmu sysfs directory.
> 
> The main change since previous patch series is:
>  Patch 3 introduces PMU context switch callback, and uses the callback to
>  unify the flush branch stack codeo.
> 
>  Patch 4 uses the context switch callback to save/restore the LBR stack.

>From what I can tell this is the exact same drivel I rejected earlier.

Same shitty changelogs, same shitty code.

Do not waste my time like this.

  parent reply	other threads:[~2013-10-04 10:55 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2013-09-26  8:28 [RFC PATCH 0/7] perf, x86: Reduce lbr_sel_map size Yan, Zheng
2013-09-26  8:28 ` [RFC PATCH 1/7] " Yan, Zheng
2013-09-26  8:28 ` [RFC PATCH 2/7] perf, x86: Basic Haswell LBR call stack support Yan, Zheng
2013-09-26  8:28 ` [RFC PATCH 3/7] perf, core: replace flush_branch_stack with ctxsw callback Yan, Zheng
2013-09-26  8:28 ` [RFC PATCH 4/7] perf, x86: Save/resotre LBR stack during context switch Yan, Zheng
2013-09-26  8:28 ` [RFC PATCH 5/7] perf, core: Pass perf_sample_data to perf_callchain() Yan, Zheng
2013-09-26  8:28 ` [RFC PATCH 6/7] perf, x86: Use LBR call stack to get user callchain Yan, Zheng
2013-09-26  8:28 ` [RFC PATCH 7/7] perf, x86: Discard zero length call entries in LBR call stack Yan, Zheng
2013-10-04 10:55 ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
2013-10-04 13:35   ` [RFC PATCH 0/7] perf, x86: Reduce lbr_sel_map size Andi Kleen
2013-10-04 14:42     ` Peter Zijlstra

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=20131004105535.GH3081@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net \
    --to=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=andi@firstfloor.org \
    --cc=eranian@google.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=zheng.z.yan@intel.com \
    /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