From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753502AbbGXBTD (ORCPT ); Thu, 23 Jul 2015 21:19:03 -0400 Received: from e17.ny.us.ibm.com ([129.33.205.207]:58809 "EHLO e17.ny.us.ibm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752931AbbGXBTA (ORCPT ); Thu, 23 Jul 2015 21:19:00 -0400 X-Helo: d01dlp03.pok.ibm.com X-MailFrom: sukadev@linux.vnet.ibm.com X-RcptTo: sparclinux@vger.kernel.org Date: Thu, 23 Jul 2015 18:17:43 -0700 From: Sukadev Bhattiprolu To: Peter Zijlstra Cc: Ingo Molnar , Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo , Michael Ellerman , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org, linux-s390@vger.kernel.org, sparclinux@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 7/8] perf: Define PMU_TXN_READ interface Message-ID: <20150724011743.GA5847@us.ibm.com> References: <1436929315-28520-1-git-send-email-sukadev@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <1436929315-28520-8-git-send-email-sukadev@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20150716222015.GO3644@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> <20150722015045.GA24420@us.ibm.com> <20150722055503.GO25159@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> <20150722231916.GA1863@us.ibm.com> <20150723080435.GE25159@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20150723080435.GE25159@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> X-Operating-System: Linux 2.0.32 on an i486 User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) X-TM-AS-MML: disable X-Content-Scanned: Fidelis XPS MAILER x-cbid: 15072401-0041-0000-0000-000000E86698 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Peter Zijlstra [peterz@infradead.org] wrote: | On Wed, Jul 22, 2015 at 04:19:16PM -0700, Sukadev Bhattiprolu wrote: | > Peter Zijlstra [peterz@infradead.org] wrote: | > | I've not woken up yet, and not actually fully read the email, but can | > | you stuff the entire above chunk inside the IPI? | > | | > | I think you could then actually optimize __perf_event_read() as well, | > | because all these events should be on the same context, so no point in | > | calling update_*time*() for every event or so. | > | | > | > Do you mean something like this (will move the rename to a separate | > patch before posting): | | More like so.. please double check, I've not even had tea yet. Yeah, I realized I had ignored the 'event->cpu' spec. Will try this out. Thanks, Sukadev