[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <c62985530910050224u5e755808jc2a25c3dd5c172da@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 5 Oct 2009 11:24:53 +0200
From: Frédéric Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
"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
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] perf_core: provide a kernel-internal interface to get
to performance counters
2009/10/5 Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>:
>
> * Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> wrote:
>> 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.
>
> We could add internal per cpu buffering before it hits any globally
> visible output channel. (That has come up when i talked to Frederic
> about the function tracer.) We could even have page sized output (via
> the introduction of a NOP event that fills up to the next page edge).
That looks good for the counting/sampling fast path, but would that scale
once it comes to reordering in the globally visible output channel?
Such a union has its costs.
--
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