From: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Vince Weaver <vincent.weaver@maine.edu>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: perf: multiple mmap of fd behavior on x86/ARM
Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2017 12:06:39 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170811110639.GC12985@leverpostej> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170811105252.zuaihhfyvvpvm3uz@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
On Fri, Aug 11, 2017 at 12:52:52PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 11, 2017 at 11:01:27AM +0100, Mark Rutland wrote:
> > On Thu, Aug 10, 2017 at 02:48:52PM -0400, Vince Weaver wrote:
> > >
> > > So I was working on my perf_event_tests on ARM/ARM64 (the end goal was to
> > > get ARM64 rdpmc support working, but apparently those patches never made
> > > it upstream?)
> >
> > IIUC by 'rdpmc' you mean direct userspace counter access?
> >
> > Patches for that never made it upstream. Last I saw, there were no
> > patches in a suitable state for review.
> >
> > There are also difficulties (e.g. big.LITTLE systems where the number of
> > counters can differ across CPUs) which have yet to be solved.
>
> How would that be a problem? The API gives an explicit index to use with
> the 'rdpmc' instruction.
It's a problem because access to unimplemented counters trap. So if a
task gets migrated from a CPU with N counters to one with N-1, accessing
counter N would be problematic.
So we'd need to account for that somehow, in addition to the usual
sequence counter fun to verify the index was valid when the access was
performed.
Thanks,
Mark.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-08-11 11:07 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-08-10 18:48 perf: multiple mmap of fd behavior on x86/ARM Vince Weaver
2017-08-11 10:01 ` Mark Rutland
2017-08-11 10:52 ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-08-11 11:06 ` Mark Rutland [this message]
2017-08-11 14:53 ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-08-14 10:57 ` Will Deacon
2017-08-11 15:25 ` Vince Weaver
2017-08-11 16:23 ` Mark Rutland
2017-08-11 16:51 ` Vince Weaver
2017-08-11 17:09 ` Mark Rutland
2017-08-11 19:01 ` Vince Weaver
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=20170811110639.GC12985@leverpostej \
--to=mark.rutland@arm.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=vincent.weaver@maine.edu \
--cc=will.deacon@arm.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