[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20130916060736.GN21832@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Mon, 16 Sep 2013 08:07:36 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
Cc: mingo@...nel.org, hpa@...or.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
tglx@...utronix.de, linux-tip-commits@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [tip:perf/core] perf/x86/intel: Clean-up/reduce PEBS code
On Fri, Sep 13, 2013 at 11:18:21PM -0700, Andi Kleen wrote:
> tip-bot for Peter Zijlstra <tipbot@...or.com> writes:
> > +
> > + at = (struct pebs_record_nhm *)(unsigned long)ds->pebs_buffer_base;
> > + top = (struct pebs_record_nhm *)(unsigned long)ds->pebs_index;
> >
> > ds->pebs_index = ds->pebs_buffer_base;
> >
> > + n = (top - at) / x86_pmu.pebs_record_size;
>
>
> This adds a full slow division to the PEBS hot path.
>
> Does not seem like a improvement to me.
There already was an implicit division there, and
sizeof(pebs_record_hsw) = 176, can it really optimize that constant
division?
I suppose we could go and introduce CONFIG_PERF_DEBUG and stuff sanity
checks under that.. :/
--
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