From: Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org>
To: Vince Weaver <vince@deater.net>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>,
Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Mike Galbraith <efault@gmx.de>
Subject: Re: [numbers] perfmon/pfmon overhead of 17%-94%
Date: Fri, 03 Jul 2009 20:31:04 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87bpo1aaaf.fsf@basil.nowhere.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0907021702380.13747@pianoman.cluster.toy> (Vince Weaver's message of "Thu, 2 Jul 2009 17:07:02 -0400 (EDT)")
Vince Weaver <vince@deater.net> writes:
>
> as I said in a previous post, on most x86 chips the instructions_retired
> counter also includes any hardware interrupts that occur during the
> process runtime.
On the other hand afaik near all chips have interrupt performance counter
events.
So if you're willing to waste one of the variable counter registers
you can always count those and then correct based on the other count.
But the question is of course if it's worth it, the error should
be really small. Also you could always lose a few cycles occasionally
in other "random" events, which can happen too.
> So any clock interrupts, etc, show up as an extra
> instruction. So on the "million" benchmark, it's usually +/- 2 extra
> instructions.
1-2 error in a million doesn't sound like a catastrophic problem.
-Andi
--
ak@linux.intel.com -- Speaking for myself only.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-07-03 18:31 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 27+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-06-24 13:59 performance counter 20% error finding retired instruction count Vince Weaver
2009-06-24 15:10 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-06-25 2:12 ` Vince Weaver
2009-06-25 6:50 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-06-25 9:13 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-06-26 18:22 ` Vince Weaver
2009-06-26 19:12 ` Peter Zijlstra
2009-06-27 5:32 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-06-26 19:23 ` Vince Weaver
2009-06-27 6:04 ` performance counter ~0.4% " Ingo Molnar
2009-06-27 6:44 ` [numbers] perfmon/pfmon overhead of 17%-94% Ingo Molnar
2009-06-29 18:25 ` Vince Weaver
2009-06-29 21:02 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-07-02 21:07 ` Vince Weaver
2009-07-03 7:58 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-07-03 21:43 ` Vince Weaver
2009-07-03 18:31 ` Andi Kleen [this message]
2009-07-03 21:25 ` Vince Weaver
2009-07-03 23:40 ` Andi Kleen
2009-06-29 23:46 ` [patch] perf_counter: Add enable-on-exec attribute Ingo Molnar
2009-06-29 23:55 ` [numbers] perfmon/pfmon overhead of 17%-94% Ingo Molnar
2009-06-30 0:05 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-06-27 6:48 ` performance counter ~0.4% error finding retired instruction count Paul Mackerras
2009-06-27 17:28 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-06-29 2:12 ` Paul Mackerras
2009-06-29 2:13 ` Paul Mackerras
2009-06-29 3:48 ` 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=87bpo1aaaf.fsf@basil.nowhere.org \
--to=andi@firstfloor.org \
--cc=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
--cc=efault@gmx.de \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=paulus@samba.org \
--cc=vince@deater.net \
/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