[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <AANLkTikZgmUQ2SHOL41_t-Vwss8T6tazTRJT2bVR+xRQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2011 18:14:19 +0100
From: Stephane Eranian <eranian@...gle.com>
To: Lin Ming <ming.m.lin@...el.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>,
lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 2/3 v3] perf: Implement Nehalem uncore pmu
Lin,
On Thu, Dec 2, 2010 at 6:20 AM, Lin Ming <ming.m.lin@...el.com> wrote:
> +static void uncore_pmu_enable_all(int nmi_core)
> +{
> + u64 ctrl;
> +
> + ctrl = ((1 << UNCORE_NUM_GENERAL_COUNTERS) - 1) | MSR_UNCORE_PERF_GLOBAL_CTRL_EN_FC0;
> +
> + /* Route all interrupts to the first core that accesses uncore */
> + ctrl |= 1ULL << (48 + nmi_core);
> +
> + wrmsrl(MSR_UNCORE_PERF_GLOBAL_CTRL, ctrl);
> +}
Are you sure nmi_core is always between 0-3 on a 4-core system and 0-5
on a 6-core system?
In other words, is that what topology_core_id(raw_smp_processor_id()) returns?
Note that, unfortunately, I have not seen documentation that says on
6-core system
UNC_GLOBAL_CTRL has 6 interrupt target bits, but it would make sense.
Otherwise, you will get a kernel panic when you wrmsr UNC_GLOBAL_CTRL.
> +
> + if (uncore->n_events == 1) {
> + nmi_core = topology_core_id(raw_smp_processor_id());
> + uncore->nmi_core = nmi_core;
> + uncore_pmu_enable_all(nmi_core);
> + }
--
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