[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20130910152845.GI31370@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Tue, 10 Sep 2013 17:28:45 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: eranian@...il.com
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...radead.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
Subject: Re: PEBS bug on HSW: "Unexpected number of pebs records 10" (was:
Re: [GIT PULL] perf changes for v3.12)
On Tue, Sep 10, 2013 at 07:15:19AM -0700, Stephane Eranian wrote:
> The threshold is where to generate the interrupt. It does not mean
> where to stop PEBS recording.
It does, since we don't set a reset value. So once a PEBS assist
happens, that counter stops until we reprogram it in the PMI.
> So it is possible that in HSW, we may
> get into a situation where it takes time to get to the handler to stop
> the PMU. I don't know how given we use NMI. Well, unless we were
> already servicing an NMI at the time. But given that we stop the PMU
> almost immediately in the handler, I don't see how that would
> possible. The other oddity in HSW is that we clear the NMI on entry
> to the handler and not at the end. I never gotten an good explanation
> as to why that was necessary. So maybe it is related...
Even if the PMI was delayed that counter would never do another entry.
So I really don't see how we can have more than nr_counters PEBS entries
in the buffer.
--
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