[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1299678959.2308.2989.camel@twins>
Date: Wed, 09 Mar 2011 14:55:59 +0100
From: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
To: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...hat.com>,
Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>,
Stephane Eranian <eranian@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] perf: Fix the software events state check
On Wed, 2011-03-09 at 14:52 +0100, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
>
> It seems that ->stop() / ->start() are called from perf_adjust_period()
> to update the hardware with the new settings of period_left. The events
> are stopped to avoid any race with events triggering with a stale period_left
> in the hardware level when the software one has been updated, I guess.
>
> So it doesn't seem to fix any existing bug because for ->stop() and ->start()
> are only useful for hardware events right now. But we may call ->stop() and
> ->start() for further purpose later. In fact that paves the way for the event
> exclusion patchset I'm about to post.
>
> So it should be .39 material. But a confirmation from Peter would be nice.
Yeah, that sounds about right, I've already queued these patches
for .39.
--
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