[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <alpine.LFD.2.01.0906151302200.6276@localhost.localdomain>
Date: Mon, 15 Jun 2009 13:04:02 -0700 (PDT)
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
cc: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@...ymtl.ca>, mingo@...hat.com,
hpa@...or.com, paulus@...ba.org, acme@...hat.com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl,
penberg@...helsinki.fi, vegard.nossum@...il.com, efault@....de,
jeremy@...p.org, npiggin@...e.de, tglx@...utronix.de,
linux-tip-commits@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [tip:perfcounters/core] perf_counter: x86: Fix call-chain support
to use NMI-safe methods
On Mon, 15 Jun 2009, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> Well i guess it depends. For server apps it is true - syscalls are a
> lot more dominant, MMs are long-running so any startup cost gets
> amortized and pagefaults are avoided.
>
> For something like a kernel build we have 7 times as many pagefaults
> as syscalls:
Ingo - calm down.
This is not about page faults.
This is purely about taps FROM KERNEL SPACE.
Yes, for the kernel build we have 7 times as many page faults as system
calls, BUT I BET 99.9% of them are from user mode!
The whole "open-code iret" only works for exceptions that happened in
kernel mode. That's a _vanishingly_ small number (outside of device
interrupts that happen during idle).
Linus
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists