[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20150903100134.GD13114@krava.redhat.com>
Date: Thu, 3 Sep 2015 12:01:34 +0200
From: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>
To: Stephane Eranian <eranian@...gle.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, acme@...hat.com,
peterz@...radead.org, mingo@...e.hu, ak@...ux.intel.com,
namhyung@...nel.org, kan.liang@...el.com, dsahern@...il.com,
adrian.hunter@...el.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] perf stat: fix per-pkg event reporting bug
On Wed, Sep 02, 2015 at 03:17:51PM +0200, Stephane Eranian wrote:
SNIP
> + /*
> + * we do not consider an event that has not run as a good
> + * instance to mark a package as used (skip=1). Otherwise
> + * we may run into a situation where the first CPU in a package
> + * is not running anything, yet the second is, and this function
> + * would mark the package as used after the first CPU and would
> + * not read the values from the second CPU.
> + */
> + if (!(vals->run && vals->ena))
> + return 0;
> +
> s = cpu_map__get_socket(cpus, cpu);
> if (s < 0)
> return -1;
> @@ -235,7 +247,7 @@ process_counter_values(struct perf_stat_config *config, struct perf_evsel *evsel
> static struct perf_counts_values zero;
> bool skip = false;
>
> - if (check_per_pkg(evsel, cpu, &skip)) {
> + if (check_per_pkg(evsel, aggr, cpu, &skip)) {
should we pass 'count' instead o 'aggr' ?
jirka
--
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