[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20130205190902.GV30577@one.firstfloor.org>
Date: Tue, 5 Feb 2013 20:09:02 +0100
From: Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
To: Stephane Eranian <eranian@...gle.com>
Cc: Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...hat.com>,
Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>,
Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>,
Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/5] perf, x86: Support full width counting
On Tue, Feb 05, 2013 at 04:15:26PM +0100, Stephane Eranian wrote:
> > --- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/perf_event_intel.c
> > +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/perf_event_intel.c
> > @@ -2228,5 +2228,11 @@ __init int intel_pmu_init(void)
> > }
> > }
> >
> > + /* Support full width counters using alternative MSR range */
> > + if (x86_pmu.intel_cap.fw_write) {
> > + x86_pmu.max_period = x86_pmu.cntval_mask;
>
> Something is not clear to me: What happens to the fixed counters with
> full writes? Were they already full-width? The SDM does not explain what
> happens to them with this extension. Could you clarify?
I tested and they always support the full reported width.
-Andi
--
ak@...ux.intel.com -- Speaking for myself only.
--
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