[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1317923665.29658.18.camel@twins>
Date: Thu, 06 Oct 2011 19:54:24 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Stephane Eranian <eranian@...gle.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, mingo@...e.hu, acme@...hat.com,
ming.m.lin@...el.com, andi@...stfloor.org, robert.richter@....com,
ravitillo@....gov
Subject: Re: [PATCH 06/12] perf_events: implement PERF_SAMPLE_BRANCH for
Intel X86
On Thu, 2011-10-06 at 16:49 +0200, Stephane Eranian wrote:
> @@ -876,6 +889,13 @@ static void intel_pmu_disable_event(struct perf_event *event)
> return;
> }
>
> + /*
> + * must disable before any actual event
> + * because any event may be combined with LBR
> + */
> + if (intel_pmu_needs_lbr_smpl(event))
> + intel_pmu_lbr_disable(event);
> +
> if (unlikely(hwc->config_base == MSR_ARCH_PERFMON_FIXED_CTR_CTRL)) {
> intel_pmu_disable_fixed(hwc);
> return;
I don't get that, since until you disable the counter a PMI could happen
(*) you'd need to disable the LBR after you disable the counters.
* doesn't actually happen since we likely have the whole pmu disabled
here, but that's another thing ;-)
--
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