lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Mon, 18 Jan 2010 14:54:58 +0100 From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> To: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com> Cc: Stephane Eranian <eranian@...gle.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, mingo@...e.hu, paulus@...ba.org, davem@...emloft.net, perfmon2-devel@...ts.sf.net, eranian@...il.com Subject: Re: [PATCH] perf_events: improve x86 event scheduling (v5) On Mon, 2010-01-18 at 14:43 +0100, Frederic Weisbecker wrote: > > Shouldn't we actually use the core based pmu->enable(),disable() > model called from kernel/perf_event.c:event_sched_in(), > like every other events, where we can fill up the queue of hardware > events to be scheduled, and then call a hw_check_constraints() > when we finish a group scheduling? Well the thing that makes hw_perf_group_sched_in() useful is that you can add a bunch of events and not have to reschedule for each one, but instead do a single schedule pass. That said you do have a point, maybe we can express this particular thing differently.. maybe a pre and post group call like: void hw_perf_group_sched_in_begin(struct pmu *pmu) int hw_perf_group_sched_in_end(struct pmu *pmu) That way we know we need to track more state for rollback and can give the pmu implementation leeway to delay scheduling/availablility tests. Paul, would that work for you too? Then there's still the question of having events of multiple hw pmus in a single group, I'd be perfectly fine with saying that's not allowed, what to others think? -- 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