From: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>
To: "kan.liang@intel.com" <kan.liang@intel.com>
Cc: "a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl" <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>,
"mingo@redhat.com" <mingo@redhat.com>,
"acme@kernel.org" <acme@kernel.org>,
"eranian@google.com" <eranian@google.com>,
"ak@linux.intel.com" <ak@linux.intel.com>,
"adrian.hunter@intel.com" <adrian.hunter@intel.com>,
"dsahern@gmail.com" <dsahern@gmail.com>,
"jolsa@kernel.org" <jolsa@kernel.org>,
"namhyung@kernel.org" <namhyung@kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/9] perf/x86: core_misc PMU disable and enable support
Date: Fri, 17 Jul 2015 13:11:41 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20150717121141.GC26091@leverpostej> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1437078831-10152-3-git-send-email-kan.liang@intel.com>
On Thu, Jul 16, 2015 at 09:33:44PM +0100, kan.liang@intel.com wrote:
> From: Kan Liang <kan.liang@intel.com>
>
> This patch implements core_misc PMU disable and enable functions.
> core_misc PMU counters are free running counters, so it's impossible to
> stop/start them.
Doesn't that effectively mean you can't group them? You'll get arbitrary
noise because counters will be incrementing as you read them.
[...]
> @@ -927,6 +933,10 @@ int p6_pmu_init(void);
>
> int knc_pmu_init(void);
>
> +void intel_core_misc_pmu_enable(void);
> +
> +void intel_core_misc_pmu_disable(void);
> +
> ssize_t events_sysfs_show(struct device *dev, struct device_attribute *attr,
> char *page);
>
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/perf_event_intel.c b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/perf_event_intel.c
> index b9826a9..651a86d 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/perf_event_intel.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/perf_event_intel.c
> @@ -1586,6 +1586,8 @@ static int intel_pmu_handle_irq(struct pt_regs *regs)
> if (!x86_pmu.late_ack)
> apic_write(APIC_LVTPC, APIC_DM_NMI);
> __intel_pmu_disable_all();
> + if (cpuc->core_misc_active_mask)
> + intel_core_misc_pmu_disable();
Huh? Free running counters have nothing to do with the PMU interrupt;
there's nothing they can do to trigger it. This feels very hacky.
If this is necessary, surely it should live in __intel_pmu_disable_all?
[...]
> +void intel_core_misc_pmu_enable(void)
> +{
> + struct cpu_hw_events *cpuc = this_cpu_ptr(&cpu_hw_events);
> + struct perf_event *event;
> + u64 start;
> + int bit;
> +
> + for_each_set_bit(bit, cpuc->core_misc_active_mask,
> + X86_CORE_MISC_COUNTER_MAX) {
> + event = cpuc->core_misc_events[bit];
> + start = core_misc_pmu_read_counter(event);
> + local64_set(&event->hw.prev_count, start);
> + }
> +}
> +
> +void intel_core_misc_pmu_disable(void)
> +{
> + struct cpu_hw_events *cpuc = this_cpu_ptr(&cpu_hw_events);
> + int bit;
> +
> + for_each_set_bit(bit, cpuc->core_misc_active_mask,
> + X86_CORE_MISC_COUNTER_MAX) {
> + core_misc_pmu_event_update(cpuc->core_misc_events[bit]);
> + }
> +}
> +
> static void core_misc_pmu_event_del(struct perf_event *event, int mode)
> {
> core_misc_pmu_event_stop(event, PERF_EF_UPDATE);
> @@ -863,6 +899,11 @@ static void __init core_misc_pmus_register(void)
> .capabilities = PERF_PMU_CAP_NO_INTERRUPT,
> };
>
> + if (type->type == perf_intel_core_misc_thread) {
> + type->pmu.pmu_disable = (void *) intel_core_misc_pmu_disable;
> + type->pmu.pmu_enable = (void *) intel_core_misc_pmu_enable;
Why are you suprressing an entirely valid compiler warning here?
The signatures of intel_core_misc_pmu_{enable,disable} aren't right. Fix
them to take a struct pmu *.
Mark.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2015-07-17 12:12 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 33+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2015-07-16 20:33 [PATCH 0/9] Intel core misc PMUs support kan.liang
2015-07-16 20:33 ` [PATCH 1/9] perf/x86: Add " kan.liang
2015-07-16 20:33 ` [PATCH 2/9] perf/x86: core_misc PMU disable and enable support kan.liang
2015-07-17 12:11 ` Mark Rutland [this message]
2015-07-17 13:46 ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-07-17 13:51 ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-07-17 15:35 ` Liang, Kan
2015-07-17 17:01 ` Andy Lutomirski
2015-07-17 17:52 ` Liang, Kan
2015-07-17 17:58 ` Andy Lutomirski
2015-07-17 18:15 ` Liang, Kan
2015-07-17 18:56 ` Andy Lutomirski
2015-07-17 21:11 ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-07-16 20:33 ` [PATCH 3/9] perf/x86: Add is_hardware_event kan.liang
2015-07-17 10:48 ` Mark Rutland
2015-07-17 15:03 ` Liang, Kan
2015-07-17 15:47 ` Mark Rutland
2015-07-17 16:11 ` Mark Rutland
2015-07-16 20:33 ` [PATCH 4/9] perf/x86: special case per-cpu core misc PMU events kan.liang
2015-07-17 12:21 ` Mark Rutland
2015-07-17 12:55 ` Peter Zijlstra
2015-07-17 18:11 ` Stephane Eranian
2015-07-17 20:17 ` Andi Kleen
2015-07-20 16:12 ` Mark Rutland
2015-07-16 20:33 ` [PATCH 5/9] perf,tools: open event with it's own cpus and threads kan.liang
2015-07-16 20:33 ` [PATCH 6/9] perf,tools: Dump per-sample freq in report -D kan.liang
2015-07-16 20:33 ` [PATCH 7/9] perf,tools: save APERF/MPERF/TSC in struct perf_sample kan.liang
2015-07-16 20:33 ` [PATCH 8/9] perf,tools: caculate and save tsc/avg/bzy freq in he_stat kan.liang
2015-07-17 20:25 ` Andi Kleen
2015-07-17 20:57 ` Liang, Kan
2015-07-17 21:27 ` Andi Kleen
2015-07-16 20:33 ` [PATCH 9/9] perf,tools: Show freq in perf report --stdio kan.liang
2015-07-17 11:39 ` [PATCH 0/9] Intel core misc PMUs support Ingo Molnar
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=20150717121141.GC26091@leverpostej \
--to=mark.rutland@arm.com \
--cc=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
--cc=acme@kernel.org \
--cc=adrian.hunter@intel.com \
--cc=ak@linux.intel.com \
--cc=dsahern@gmail.com \
--cc=eranian@google.com \
--cc=jolsa@kernel.org \
--cc=kan.liang@intel.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=namhyung@kernel.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