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: <bd4cb8901001210243y16dbbf8doe66cf24d15120443@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Thu, 21 Jan 2010 11:43:02 +0100
From:	Stephane Eranian <eranian@...gle.com>
To:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, mingo@...e.hu, paulus@...ba.org,
	davem@...emloft.net, fweisbec@...il.com,
	perfmon2-devel@...ts.sf.net, eranian@...il.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] perf_events: improve x86 event scheduling (v5)

On Thu, Jan 21, 2010 at 11:36 AM, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> wrote:
> On Mon, 2010-01-18 at 10:58 +0200, Stephane Eranian wrote:
>>  void hw_perf_enable(void)
>>  {
>
>
>> +               cpuc->n_added = 0;
>> +               perf_events_lapic_init();
>
> Just wondering, why do we need that lapic_init() there?
>
I think I picked it up from x86_pmu_enable(). I don't think
you necessarily need it here. Not clear to me why it was
in x86_pmu_enable() to begin with.

I will post a new version of the patch which fixes some bugs and
also implements true fast path (reuse of previous assignment). It turned
out, things were a bit more complicated than what I had in v5.
--
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/