[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20130501115549.GA19811@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 1 May 2013 13:55:49 +0200
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
To: Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, stable@...r.kernel.org,
eranian@...gle.com, Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] Fix perf LBR filtering
* Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org> wrote:
> > I don't think you want to spend that many cycles in the NMI
> > handler for a dubious feature. Ok in theory you could
> > add something with binary search, but that would be quite
> > a bit of effort and it would be probably challenging
> > to do that all NMI safe.
>
> If anyone using LBR sees that overhead it can be improved. You or others
> who care can improve it.
Also, improving the performance of is_module_text() shouldn't be too hard:
an RCU rbtree should be enough.
It's NMI-safe: when the rb-tree is in the middle of a rotation we'll
simply not find the address and 'revert' to the worst case non-filtering
your patch does all the time, but in the likely case it does find it and
works as expected.
Thanks,
Ingo
--
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