[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1254729210.26976.15.camel@twins>
Date: Mon, 05 Oct 2009 09:53:30 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Cc: "K.Prasad" <prasad@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>,
"Frank Ch. Eigler" <fche@...hat.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] perf_core: provide a kernel-internal interface to
get to performance counters
On Thu, 2009-10-01 at 10:53 +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> i'd suggest you extend perf events with a 'system
> wide' event abstraction, which:
>
> - Enumerates such registered events (via a list)
>
> - Adds a CPU hotplug handler (which clones those events over to a new
> CPU and directs it back to the ring-buffer of the existing event(s)
> [if any])
>
> - Plus a state field that allows the filtering out of stray/premature
> events.
>
> Such an add-on layer/abstraction would sure be useful in other cases as
> well. It might make sense to expose it to user-space and make perf top
> use it by default.
Non-trivial.
Something like this would imply a single output channel for all these
CPUs, and we've already seen that stuffing too many CPUs down one such
channel (using -M) leads to significant performance issues.
Therefore I would strongly argue to let the kernel interface be what it
is and solve this in a userspace library for those who care.
We really cannot sanely support an all-CPUs abstraction without running
into trouble.
--
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