[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1347538265.15764.129.camel@twins>
Date: Thu, 13 Sep 2012 14:11:05 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Stephane Eranian <eranian@...gle.com>
Cc: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>,
Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH] perf, intel: Don't touch MSR_IA32_DEBUGCTLMSR from
NMI context
On Thu, 2012-09-13 at 13:49 +0200, Stephane Eranian wrote:
> Should be, though it is pretty ugly to stash all of this in the
> put/get constraints.
Agreed, I almost added two extra functions for it but when I went to
look at where to call them I ended up next to get/put constraints.
> I will run some tests.
>
> I wonder what this does when you come in to get/put with a fake cpuc. You don't
> want to perturb the local lbr which may be in use.
Fake cpu will never set ->alloc and thus intel_pmu_has_lbr() should fail
and we don't do anything.
--
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