[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1325717396.3084.12.camel@laptop>
Date: Wed, 04 Jan 2012 23:49:56 +0100
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Stephane Eranian <eranian@...gle.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, mingo@...e.hu, gleb@...hat.com,
asharma@...com, vince@...ter.net, wcohen@...hat.com
Subject: Re: perf_events: proposed fix for broken intr throttling (repost)
On Wed, 2012-01-04 at 21:33 +0000, Stephane Eranian wrote:
> > I don't think it needs that, I do dislike the unconditional iterate all
> > events thing though. Maybe we can set some per-cpu state indicating
> > someone got throttled (rare under normal operation -- you'd hope) and
> > only iterate to unthrottle when we find this set.
> >
> Could try that too.
>
> > I think the event scheduling resulting from migration will already
> > re-enable the event, avoiding the loss of unthrottle due to that..
> > although it would be good to verify that.
> >
> Yes, you're not dead forever, but still it is not acceptable as is.
Oh for sure, I didn't mean it like that. What I was getting at is a
counter getting throttled on one cpu, setting the per-cpu variable,
getting migrated and not getting unthrottled due to now living on
another cpu which doesn't have the per-cpu thing set.
If the scheduling resulting from the migration already unthrottles that
scenario can't happen.
--
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