[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20110419103927.GV31407@erda.amd.com>
Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2011 12:39:27 +0200
From: Robert Richter <robert.richter@....com>
To: Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
CC: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Stephane Eranian <eranian@...gle.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/4] perf, x86: Use ALTERNATIVE() to check for
X86_FEATURE_PERFCTR_CORE
On 18.04.11 16:00:57, Andi Kleen wrote:
> Robert Richter <robert.richter@....com> writes:
>
> > Using ALTERNATIVE() when checking for X86_FEATURE_PERFCTR_CORE avoids
> > an extra pointer chase and data cache hit.
>
> Is that really a performance critical path?
>
> Seems more like unnecessary obfuscation to me.
We hotest path is in perf_pmu_disable(), which happens at least with
every task switch when calling the event scheduler.
-Robert
--
Advanced Micro Devices, Inc.
Operating System Research Center
--
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