[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <AANLkTinDBPsUaNhTOv7fgz-u3TWur08-HA3SpLt9s=BV@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2011 15:43:50 +0100
From: Stephane Eranian <eranian@...gle.com>
To: Lin Ming <ming.m.lin@...el.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 -tip] perf: x86, add SandyBridge support
On Mon, Feb 28, 2011 at 3:33 PM, Lin Ming <ming.m.lin@...el.com> wrote:
> On Mon, 2011-02-28 at 20:25 +0800, Stephane Eranian wrote:
>> On Mon, Feb 28, 2011 at 10:15 AM, Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl> wrote:
>> > On Mon, 2011-02-28 at 15:22 +0800, Lin Ming wrote:
>> >> This patch adds basic SandyBridge support, including hardware cache
>> >> events and PEBS events support.
>> >>
>> >> LLC-* hareware cache events don't work for now, it depends on the
>> >> offcore patches.
>> >
>> > What's the status of those, Stephane reported some problems last I
>> > remember?
>> >
>> >
>> >> #define INTEL_EVENT_CONSTRAINT(c, n) \
>> >> EVENT_CONSTRAINT(c, n, ARCH_PERFMON_EVENTSEL_EVENT)
>> >> +#define INTEL_EVENT_CONSTRAINT2(c, n) \
>> >> + EVENT_CONSTRAINT(c, n, INTEL_ARCH_EVENT_MASK)
>> >
>> > That's a particularly bad name, how about something like
>> >
>> > INTEL_UEVENT_CONSTRAINT or somesuch.
>> >
>> >> @@ -702,7 +738,13 @@ static void intel_ds_init(void)
>> >> printk(KERN_CONT "PEBS fmt1%c, ", pebs_type);
>> >> x86_pmu.pebs_record_size = sizeof(struct pebs_record_nhm);
>> >> x86_pmu.drain_pebs = intel_pmu_drain_pebs_nhm;
>> >> - x86_pmu.pebs_constraints = intel_nehalem_pebs_events;
>> >> + switch (boot_cpu_data.x86_model) {
>> >> + case 42: /* SandyBridge */
>> >> + x86_pmu.pebs_constraints = intel_snb_pebs_events;
>> >> + break;
>> >> + default:
>> >> + x86_pmu.pebs_constraints = intel_nehalem_pebs_events;
>> >> + }
>> >> break;
>> >>
>> >> default:
>> >
>> > We already have this massive model switch right after this function,
>> > might as well move the pebs constraint assignment there.
>> >
>> My PEBS patch was going to cleanup this part, though it was using
>> it's own switch
>> statement.
>
> Did you send out the patch? A link?
>
For what?
>
>
--
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