linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] perf_events: improve x86 event scheduling (v5)

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20100118162209.GH10364@nowhere>
Date:	Mon, 18 Jan 2010 17:22:12 +0100
From:	Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>
To:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
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, Jan 18, 2010 at 03:59:58PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Mon, 2010-01-18 at 15:53 +0100, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> 
> > Not sure what you both mean by this core VS uncore thing :)
> > Is it about hardware counters that apply to single hardware threads
> > or shared among them inside a same core?
> 
> Yeah intel has two PMUs, one per logical cpu and one per socket/node. We
> currently don't support the node one yet.
> 
> So the thing with these socket wide things is is that they are not able
> to tell where the event originated, so relating that back to a task is
> only possible when there's only one task running.
> 


Ah ok.

--
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/