[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <19091.5100.328432.510132@cargo.ozlabs.ibm.com>
Date: Tue, 25 Aug 2009 08:27:56 +1000
From: Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>
To: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
Cc: eranian@...il.com, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Robert Richter <robert.richter@....com>,
Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
Maynard Johnson <mpjohn@...ibm.com>,
Carl Love <cel@...ibm.com>,
Corey J Ashford <cjashfor@...ibm.com>,
Philip Mucci <mucci@...s.utk.edu>,
Dan Terpstra <terpstra@...s.utk.edu>,
perfmon2-devel <perfmon2-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: perf_counters issue with enable_on_exec
Peter Zijlstra writes:
> 2. enable_on_exec only works on leaders, Paul, was that intended?
I think I thought that would be sufficient, but I guess it would be
cleaner if it also worked on non-leaders.
> 3. the scale stuff seems broken
>
> # perf stat -e cycles -e instructions --repeat 10 true
>
> Performance counter stats for 'true' (10 runs):
>
> 2612124 cycles ( +- 1.327% )
> 1870479 instructions # 0.716 IPC ( +- 0.132% )
>
> 0.003743155 seconds time elapsed ( +- 1.203% )
>
> # ./test-enable_on_exec true
> 2651600 PERF_COUNT_HW_CPU_CYCLES 1111509 1111509 2651600.000000
> 1832720 PERF_COUNT_HW_INSTRUCTIONS 839395242 1111509 1384043177.264637
>
> Paul, would a counter's time start running when its 'enabled' but part
> of a non-runnable group?
No, it shouldn't. If it does it's a bug.
Paul.
--
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