[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20100215045644.GK13769@brick.ozlabs.ibm.com>
Date: Mon, 15 Feb 2010 15:56:44 +1100
From: Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
fweisbec@...il.com, Dave Wootton <dwootton@...ibm.com>
Subject: Re: Why is PERF_FORMAT_GROUP incompatible with inherited events?
On Sun, Feb 14, 2010 at 01:38:27PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Sun, 2010-02-14 at 22:33 +1100, Paul Mackerras wrote:
> >
> > But we don't go and collect the count delta from children without
> > PERF_FORMAT_GROUP, so why would we with it?
>
> Yes we do, see perf_event_read_value().
Ah, true, I should have read the code more carefully.
> But now that I look at it we don't seem to do so in
> perf_output_read_one()... I guess we should fix that.
I suppose it should give the same value as read() would, but the
possibly unbounded interrupt latency is a bit of a worry. I can't
think of a way to avoid it, though (other than not using
PERF_SAMPLE_READ with inherited sampling events :).
> There is of course the lock inversion in the .read() code reported by
> stephane, but other than that is seems to actually support inherited &&
> group just fine.
>
> So I think if we fix that lock inversion and make the PERF_SAMPLE_READ
> code look like the .read() code it should all work out.
Cool.
Paul.
--
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