From: "Yan, Zheng" <zheng.z.yan@intel.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
Cc: mingo@elte.hu, andi@firstfloor.org, eranian@google.com,
jolsa@redhat.com, ming.m.lin@intel.com,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/9] perf: Generic intel uncore support
Date: Thu, 10 May 2012 15:34:49 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4FAB6F99.6010408@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1336065156.22523.34.camel@twins>
On 05/04/2012 01:12 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Wed, 2012-05-02 at 10:07 +0800, Yan, Zheng wrote:
>> +static struct intel_uncore_box *
>> +__uncore_pmu_find_box(struct intel_uncore_pmu *pmu, int phyid)
>> +{
>> + struct intel_uncore_box *box;
>> + struct hlist_head *head;
>> + struct hlist_node *node;
>> +
>> + head = &pmu->box_hash[phyid % UNCORE_BOX_HASH_SIZE];
>> + hlist_for_each_entry_rcu(box, node, head, hlist) {
>> + if (box->phy_id == phyid)
>> + return box;
>> + }
>> +
>> + return NULL;
>> +}
>
> I still don't get why something like:
>
> static struct intel_uncore_box *
> pmu_to_box(struct intel_uncore_pmu *pmu, int cpu)
> {
> return per_cpu_ptr(pmu->box, cpu);
> }
>
> doesn't work.
>
> Last time you mumbled something about PCI devices, but afaict those are
> in all respects identical to MSR devices except you talk to them using
> PCI-mmio instead of MSR registers.
>
> In fact, since its all local to the generic code there's nothing
> different between pci/msr already.
>
> So how about something like this:
>
> ---
> Makefile | 4 +-
> perf_event_intel_uncore.c | 92 ++++++++++++++++++----------------------------
> perf_event_intel_uncore.h | 4 +-
> 3 files changed, 42 insertions(+), 58 deletions(-)
>
> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/Makefile
> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/Makefile
> @@ -32,7 +32,9 @@ obj-$(CONFIG_PERF_EVENTS) += perf_event
>
> ifdef CONFIG_PERF_EVENTS
> obj-$(CONFIG_CPU_SUP_AMD) += perf_event_amd.o
> -obj-$(CONFIG_CPU_SUP_INTEL) += perf_event_p6.o perf_event_p4.o perf_event_intel_lbr.o perf_event_intel_ds.o perf_event_intel.o perf_event_intel_uncore.o
> +obj-$(CONFIG_CPU_SUP_INTEL) += perf_event_p6.o perf_event_p4.o
> +obj-$(CONFIG_CPU_SUP_INTEL) += perf_event_intel_lbr.o perf_event_intel_ds.o perf_event_intel.o
> +obj-$(CONFIG_CPU_SUP_INTEL) += perf_event_intel_uncore.o
> endif
>
> obj-$(CONFIG_X86_MCE) += mcheck/
> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/perf_event_intel_uncore.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/perf_event_intel_uncore.c
> @@ -116,40 +116,21 @@ struct intel_uncore_box *uncore_alloc_bo
> }
>
> static struct intel_uncore_box *
> -__uncore_pmu_find_box(struct intel_uncore_pmu *pmu, int phyid)
> +uncore_pmu_to_box(struct intel_uncore_pmu *pmu, int cpu)
> {
> - struct intel_uncore_box *box;
> - struct hlist_head *head;
> - struct hlist_node *node;
> -
> - head = &pmu->box_hash[phyid % UNCORE_BOX_HASH_SIZE];
> - hlist_for_each_entry_rcu(box, node, head, hlist) {
> - if (box->phy_id == phyid)
> - return box;
> - }
> -
> - return NULL;
> -}
> -
> -static struct intel_uncore_box *
> -uncore_pmu_find_box(struct intel_uncore_pmu *pmu, int phyid)
> -{
> - struct intel_uncore_box *box;
> -
> - rcu_read_lock();
> - box = __uncore_pmu_find_box(pmu, phyid);
> - rcu_read_unlock();
> -
> - return box;
> + return per_cpu_ptr(pmu->box, cpu);
> }
>
> static void uncore_pmu_add_box(struct intel_uncore_pmu *pmu,
> struct intel_uncore_box *box)
> {
> - struct hlist_head *head;
> + int cpu;
>
> - head = &pmu->box_hash[box->phy_id % UNCORE_BOX_HASH_SIZE];
> - hlist_add_head_rcu(&box->hlist, head);
> + for_each_cpu(cpu) {
> + if (box->phys_id != topology_physical_package_id(cpu))
> + continue;
> + per_cpu_ptr(pmu->box, cpu) = box;
> + }
> }
This code doesn't work for PCI uncore device if there are offline CPUs,
because topology_physical_package_id() always return 0 for offline CPUs.
So besides the per CPU variable, we still need another data structure
to track the uncore boxes. Do you still want to use per CPU variable?
Regards
Yan, Zheng
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-05-10 7:34 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 38+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-05-02 2:07 [PATCH V3 0/9] perf: Intel uncore pmu counting support Yan, Zheng
2012-05-02 2:07 ` [PATCH 1/9] perf: Export perf_assign_events Yan, Zheng
2012-05-02 2:07 ` [PATCH 2/9] perf: Allow pmu to choose cpu on which to install event Yan, Zheng
2012-05-09 6:38 ` Anshuman Khandual
2012-05-10 1:09 ` Yan, Zheng
2012-05-10 3:41 ` Anshuman Khandual
2012-05-10 10:56 ` Peter Zijlstra
2012-05-02 2:07 ` [PATCH 3/9] perf: Introduce perf_pmu_migrate_context Yan, Zheng
2012-05-02 2:07 ` [PATCH 4/9] perf: Generic intel uncore support Yan, Zheng
2012-05-03 17:12 ` Peter Zijlstra
2012-05-04 7:33 ` Yan, Zheng
2012-05-04 17:57 ` Peter Zijlstra
2012-05-10 7:34 ` Yan, Zheng [this message]
2012-05-10 10:05 ` Peter Zijlstra
2012-05-11 1:54 ` Yan, Zheng
2012-05-03 21:49 ` Peter Zijlstra
2012-05-11 6:31 ` Anshuman Khandual
2012-05-11 6:41 ` Yan, Zheng
2012-05-02 2:07 ` [PATCH 5/9] perf: Add Nehalem and Sandy Bridge " Yan, Zheng
2012-05-03 21:04 ` Peter Zijlstra
2012-05-04 5:47 ` Yan, Zheng
2012-05-03 21:04 ` Peter Zijlstra
2012-05-02 2:07 ` [PATCH 6/9] perf: Generic pci uncore device support Yan, Zheng
2012-05-03 21:37 ` Peter Zijlstra
2012-05-03 21:39 ` Peter Zijlstra
2012-05-03 21:46 ` Peter Zijlstra
2012-05-04 6:07 ` Yan, Zheng
2012-05-02 2:07 ` [PATCH 7/9] perf: Add Sandy Bridge-EP uncore support Yan, Zheng
2012-05-03 21:12 ` Peter Zijlstra
2012-05-02 2:07 ` [PATCH 8/9] perf tool: Make the event parser reentrantable Yan, Zheng
2012-05-02 2:07 ` [PATCH 9/9] perf tool: Add pmu event alias support Yan, Zheng
2012-05-03 10:56 ` Jiri Olsa
2012-05-03 11:24 ` Peter Zijlstra
2012-05-03 20:05 ` Jiri Olsa
2012-05-04 12:32 ` Yan, Zheng
2012-05-07 8:34 ` Yan, Zheng
2012-05-10 9:52 ` Jiri Olsa
2012-05-07 17:14 ` 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=4FAB6F99.6010408@intel.com \
--to=zheng.z.yan@intel.com \
--cc=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
--cc=andi@firstfloor.org \
--cc=eranian@google.com \
--cc=jolsa@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=ming.m.lin@intel.com \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
/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