[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20131002122900.GA27811@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 2 Oct 2013 14:29:01 +0200
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@...el.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, "Kleen, Andi" <andi.kleen@...el.com>,
"Shishkin, Alexander" <alexander.shishkin@...el.com>
Subject: Re: PERF_EVENT_IOC_SET_OUTPUT
* Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 02, 2013 at 12:29:56PM +0200, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> > On Wed, Oct 02, 2013 at 12:03:50PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > > On Tue, Oct 01, 2013 at 10:11:56PM +0300, Adrian Hunter wrote:
> > > > Hi
> > > >
> > > > It does not seem possible to use set-output between
> > > > task contexts of different types (e.g. a software event
> > > > to a hardware event)
> > > >
> > > > If you look at perf_event_set_output():
> > > >
> > > > /*
> > > > * If its not a per-cpu rb, it must be the same task.
> > > > */
> > > > if (output_event->cpu == -1 && output_event->ctx != event->ctx)
> > > > goto out;
> > > >
> > > > ctx (perf_event_context) won't be the same for events
> > > > of different types. Is this restriction necessary?
> > >
> > > Hmm.. so last night I wrote me a big reply saying we couldn't do it;
> > > then this morning I reconsidered and thing that something like:
> > >
> > > output_event->ctx->task != event->ctx->task
> > >
> > > should actually work.
> > >
> > > The reason it should be OK I think is because perf_mmap() will refuse to
> > > create a buffer for inherited events that have ->cpu == -1.
> > >
> > > My initial response was going to say that it wouldn't be possible
> > > because __perf_event_task_sched_out() could 'break' one ctx while still
> > > swapping the other, at which point the buffer would have to service two
> > > different tasks, potentially from different CPUs and with the buffers
> > > not actually being SMP safe that's a problem.
> >
> > I don't get what you mean with breaking or swapping a ctx. But I can
> > confirm that perf_mmap() won't allow a buffer to be remotely accessed
> > from another CPU. Now there may be other issues than locality which
> > I'm missing :)
>
> The way we 'optimize' context switches between tasks with identical
> contexts is to simply swap the context and leave the hardware alone.
Btw., this does not seem to be working very well when the perf context is
inherited:
Baseline kernel with no perf context:
aldebaran:~> taskset 1 perf stat --null perf bench sched pipe
# Running sched/pipe benchmark...
# Executed 1000000 pipe operations between two tasks
Total time: 5.024 [sec]
5.024951 usecs/op
199006 ops/sec
with inherited perf contexts:
aldebaran:~> taskset 1 perf stat perf bench sched pipe
# Running sched/pipe benchmark...
# Executed 1000000 pipe operations between two tasks
Total time: 17.869 [sec]
17.869061 usecs/op
55962 ops/sec
+12.8 usecs of perf switching fat per context switch, on a non-debug
kernel on a 2.8GHz CPU :-/
We should declare a hard feature stop until that is improved.
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