From: "Liang, Kan" <kan.liang@linux.intel.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: mingo@redhat.com, acme@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
tglx@linutronix.de, jolsa@redhat.com, eranian@google.com,
ak@linux.intel.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4] perf/x86/intel: fix event update for auto-reload
Date: Tue, 19 Dec 2017 15:24:49 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <d1c43b35-60e6-a381-9c2b-9d117d2a1ba7@linux.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <c1867cd6-4326-7e72-69e3-582dbe4d3199@linux.intel.com>
On 12/19/2017 3:08 PM, Liang, Kan wrote:
>
>
> On 12/19/2017 1:58 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>> On Mon, Dec 18, 2017 at 03:34:49AM -0800, kan.liang@linux.intel.com
>> wrote:
>>> arch/x86/events/core.c | 14 ++++++++++++++
>>> arch/x86/events/intel/ds.c | 8 +++++++-
>>> 2 files changed, 21 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/arch/x86/events/core.c b/arch/x86/events/core.c
>>> index 35552ea..f74e21d 100644
>>> --- a/arch/x86/events/core.c
>>> +++ b/arch/x86/events/core.c
>>> @@ -100,6 +100,20 @@ u64 x86_perf_event_update(struct perf_event *event,
>>> * of the count.
>>> */
>>> delta = (new_raw_count << shift) - (prev_raw_count << shift);
>>> +
>>> + /*
>>> + * Take auto-reload into account
>>> + * For the auto-reload before the last time, it went through the
>>> + * whole period (reload_val) every time.
>>> + * Just simply add period * times to the event.
>>> + *
>>> + * For the last load, the elapsed delta (event-)time need to be
>>> + * corrected by adding the period. Because the start point is
>>> -period.
>>> + */
>>> + if (reload_times > 0) {
>>> + delta += (reload_val << shift);
>>> + local64_add(reload_val * (reload_times - 1), &event->count);
>>> + }
>>> delta >>= shift;
>>> local64_add(delta, &event->count);
>>> diff --git a/arch/x86/events/intel/ds.c b/arch/x86/events/intel/ds.c
>>> index 0b693b7..f0f6026 100644
>>> --- a/arch/x86/events/intel/ds.c
>>> +++ b/arch/x86/events/intel/ds.c
>>> @@ -1256,11 +1256,17 @@ static void __intel_pmu_pebs_event(struct
>>> perf_event *event,
>>> void *base, void *top,
>>> int bit, int count)
>>> {
>>> + struct hw_perf_event *hwc = &event->hw;
>>> struct perf_sample_data data;
>>> struct pt_regs regs;
>>> void *at = get_next_pebs_record_by_bit(base, top, bit);
>>> - if (!intel_pmu_save_and_restart(event, 0, 0) &&
>>> + /*
>>> + * Now, auto-reload is only enabled in fixed period mode.
>>> + * The reload value is always hwc->sample_period.
>>> + * May need to change it, if auto-reload is enabled in freq mode
>>> later.
>>> + */
>>> + if (!intel_pmu_save_and_restart(event, hwc->sample_period, count
>>> - 1) &&
>>> !(event->hw.flags & PERF_X86_EVENT_AUTO_RELOAD))
>>> return;
>>
>> This all looks very wrong... In auto reload we should never call
>> intel_pmu_save_and_restore() in the first place I think.
>>
>> Things like x86_perf_event_update() and x86_perf_event_set_period()
>> simply _cannot_ do the right thing when we auto reload the counter.
>>
>
> I think it should be OK to call it in first place.
> For x86_perf_event_update(), the reload_times will tell if it's auto
> reload. Both period_left and event->count are carefully recalculated for
> auto reload.
Think a bit more. You are right. We cannot rely on count to tell us if
it's auto reload.
The count could also be 1 if auto reload is enabled.
I will fix it in V2.
Thanks,
Kan
> For x86_perf_event_set_period(), there is nothing special needed for
> auto reload. The period is fixed. The period_left from
> x86_perf_event_update() is already handled.
>
>
> BTW: It should be 'count' not 'count - 1' which pass to
> intel_pmu_save_and_restart(). I just found the issue. I will fix it in
> V2 with other improvements if there are any.
>
> Thanks,
> Kan
>
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-12-19 20:24 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-12-18 11:34 [PATCH 0/4] bug fix mmap read in large PEBS kan.liang
2017-12-18 11:34 ` [PATCH 1/4] perf/x86/intel: pass auto-reload information to event update kan.liang
2017-12-18 11:34 ` [PATCH 2/4] perf/x86/intel: fix event update for auto-reload kan.liang
2017-12-19 18:58 ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-12-19 20:08 ` Liang, Kan
2017-12-19 20:24 ` Liang, Kan [this message]
2017-12-19 22:07 ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-12-19 22:11 ` Andi Kleen
2017-12-19 23:25 ` Liang, Kan
2017-12-18 11:34 ` [PATCH 3/4] perf/x86: introduce read function for x86_pmu kan.liang
2017-12-18 11:34 ` [PATCH 4/4] perf/x86/intel: drain PEBS buffer in event read kan.liang
2017-12-19 19:02 ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-12-19 20:10 ` Liang, Kan
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=d1c43b35-60e6-a381-9c2b-9d117d2a1ba7@linux.intel.com \
--to=kan.liang@linux.intel.com \
--cc=acme@kernel.org \
--cc=ak@linux.intel.com \
--cc=eranian@google.com \
--cc=jolsa@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
/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