[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1350997423.13456.21.camel@twins>
Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2012 15:03:43 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
To: Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
Cc: x86@...nel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, acme@...hat.com,
eranian@...gle.com, Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 14/34] perf, x86: Avoid checkpointed counters causing
excessive TSX aborts
On Thu, 2012-10-18 at 16:19 -0700, Andi Kleen wrote:
> @@ -1079,6 +1079,17 @@ static void intel_pmu_enable_event(struct perf_event *event)
> int intel_pmu_save_and_restart(struct perf_event *event)
> {
> x86_perf_event_update(event);
> + /*
> + * For a checkpointed counter always reset back to 0. This
> + * avoids a situation where the counter overflows, aborts the
> + * transaction and is then set back to shortly before the
> + * overflow, and overflows and aborts again.
> + */
> + if (event->hw.config & HSW_INTX_CHECKPOINTED) {
Would an unlikely() make sense there? Most events won't have this set.
> + /* No race with NMIs because the counter should not be armed */
> + wrmsrl(event->hw.event_base, 0);
> + local64_set(&event->hw.prev_count, 0);
> + }
> return x86_perf_event_set_period(event);
> }
--
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