[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1282896681.1975.1760.camel@laptop>
Date: Fri, 27 Aug 2010 10:11:21 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Robert Richter <robert.richter@....com>
Cc: Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@...il.com>,
Don Zickus <dzickus@...hat.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Lin Ming <ming.m.lin@...el.com>,
"fweisbec@...il.com" <fweisbec@...il.com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"Huang, Ying" <ying.huang@...el.com>,
Yinghai Lu <yinghai@...nel.org>,
Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH -v3] perf, x86: try to handle unknown nmis with running
perfctrs
On Fri, 2010-08-27 at 09:57 +0200, Robert Richter wrote:
> On 26.08.10 14:02:50, Cyrill Gorcunov wrote:
> > > diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/perf_event_intel.c b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/perf_event_intel.c
> > > index 4539b4b..9e65a7b 100644
> > > --- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/perf_event_intel.c
> > > +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/perf_event_intel.c
> > > @@ -777,7 +777,9 @@ again:
> > >
> > > done:
> > > intel_pmu_enable_all(0);
> > > - return handled;
> > > + if (!handled)
> > > + return handled;
> > > + return ++handled;
> > > }
> > >
> > > static struct event_constraint *
> > >
> >
> > ok, it seems it just treat any unknown nmi as being came from PMU, no?
>
> Yes, this just throws away all unknown nmis after a perf nmi. It
> disables unknown nmi detection on this cpu type.
Wouldn't returning 2 be more sensible, then it would only eat a few
unknowns after each pmi? (Still assuming you return 0 when there really
was nothing to do)
--
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