[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1347459764.15764.32.camel@twins>
Date: Wed, 12 Sep 2012 16:22:44 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Stephane Eranian <eranian@...gle.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, mingo@...e.hu, ak@...ux.intel.com,
zheng.z.yan@...el.com, robert.richter@....com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/3] perf: use hrtimer for event multiplexing
On Wed, 2012-09-12 at 16:13 +0200, Stephane Eranian wrote:
> +static DEFINE_PER_CPU(struct list_head, rotation_list);
Why do you keep the rotation list? The only use seems to be:
> +void perf_cpu_hrtimer_cancel(int cpu)
> +{
> + struct list_head *head = &__get_cpu_var(rotation_list);
> + struct perf_cpu_context *cpuctx, *tmp;
> + unsigned long flags;
> +
> + if (WARN_ON(cpu != smp_processor_id()))
> + return;
> +
> + local_irq_save(flags);
> +
> + list_for_each_entry_safe(cpuctx, tmp, head, rotation_list) {
> + if (cpuctx->hrtimer_active) {
> + hrtimer_cancel(&cpuctx->hrtimer);
> + cpuctx->hrtimer_active = 0;
> + }
> + }
> +
> + local_irq_restore(flags);
> +}
Which is weird, why not use the existing for-each-pmu loop in
perf_event_exit_cpu_context() ? Or something similar to iterate all
extant PMUs and thus their cpuctxs?
Also, you can do away with hrtimer_active, you can hrtimer_cancel() on
an inactive hrtimer just fine, it will DTRT.
--
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