From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753814AbdBGKoc (ORCPT ); Tue, 7 Feb 2017 05:44:32 -0500 Received: from foss.arm.com ([217.140.101.70]:49514 "EHLO foss.arm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753268AbdBGKoa (ORCPT ); Tue, 7 Feb 2017 05:44:30 -0500 Date: Tue, 7 Feb 2017 10:43:15 +0000 From: Mark Rutland To: "Leeder, Neil" Cc: Catalin Marinas , Will Deacon , Peter Zijlstra , Ingo Molnar , Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo , linux-arm-msm@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, Mark Langsdorf , Mark Salter , Jon Masters , Timur Tabi , cov@codeaurora.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v9] perf: add qcom l2 cache perf events driver Message-ID: <20170207104315.GA28790@leverpostej> References: <1486161081-28409-1-git-send-email-nleeder@codeaurora.org> <20170206154814.GA4190@leverpostej> <8d61d7fb-71d0-190e-26e3-a72e98cfb10d@codeaurora.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <8d61d7fb-71d0-190e-26e3-a72e98cfb10d@codeaurora.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Feb 06, 2017 at 02:11:36PM -0500, Leeder, Neil wrote: > Hi Mark, > Thanks for those comments - I'll add the fixes. Cheers! > On 2/6/2017 10:48 AM, Mark Rutland wrote: > >I'm still concerned by this use of the filter_match callback, because it > >depends on the set of other active events, and can change as other > >events are scheduled in and out. > > > >When we schedule in two conflicting events A and B in order, B will fail > >its filter match. When we scheduled out A and B in order, B will succeed > >its filter match. > > > >The perf core does not expect this inconsistency, and this appears to > >break the timing update logic in event_sched_out(), when unconditionally > >called from ctx_sched_out() as part of perf_rotate_context(). > > > >I would feel much happier if we dropped l2_cache_filter_match(), at > >least for the timebeing, and handled this as we do for other cases of > >intra-pmu resource contention. > > > >We can then consider the filter_match addition on its own at a later > >point. > > So could this be detected in get_event_idx, the same way we handle > counter resource contention? That would eliminate filter_match, and > it's the same way its done in armv7 > (arch/arm/kernel/perf_event_v7.c:krait_pmu_get_event_idx()). Returning -EAGAIN from event_get_ixd() in that case sounds good to me. Thanks, Mark.