[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20131017150944.GQ10651@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Thu, 17 Oct 2013 17:09:44 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Don Zickus <dzickus@...hat.com>
Cc: dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com, eranian@...gle.com,
ak@...ux.intel.com, jmario@...hat.com,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, acme@...radead.org, mingo@...nel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] perf, x86: Optimize intel_pmu_pebs_fixup_ip()
On Thu, Oct 17, 2013 at 11:03:58AM -0400, Don Zickus wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 17, 2013 at 04:51:31PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Thu, Oct 17, 2013 at 10:49:13AM -0400, Don Zickus wrote:
> > > For some reason this patch is page faulting at an invalid address inside
> > > __intel_pmu_pebs_event().
> >
> > Ah yes, I lost a refresh, but read on; I've send a gazillion new emails
> > since ;-)
>
> Yes, I have noticed, but I got worried when you labeled some of them with
> 'untested'. :-) Thought I would stick to something a little more close to
> working.
>
> >
> > I think it was something like: s/this_cpu_ptr/this_cpu_read/ to make it
> > work again.
>
> Thanks. I will try some of the other pieces today (unlike yesterday).
The patches you find in:
http://programming.kicks-ass.net/sekrit/patches.tar.bz2
are actually running on my machine now.
One of the things I was considering was further shrinking the max basic
block size from 4k to maybe 1k or 512 bytes. Not sure what a sane basic
block length limit would be.
I did try 1k earlier today and I seemed to still get near 100% rewind
success rates.
Stephane, Andi, any clues?
--
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