[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20151021143530.GM3533@two.firstfloor.org>
Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2015 16:35:31 +0200
From: Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc: Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>, acme@...nel.org,
jolsa@...nel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>, stable@...r.kernel.org,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/5] x86, perf: Fix LBR call stack save/restore
> Any idea who much more expensive that wrmsr() is compared to the rdmsr()
> it replaces?
I don't know.
>
> If its significant we could think about having this behaviour depend on
> callstacks.
This function is only used for callstacks, otherwise it uses the LBR reset
path.
-Andi
--
ak@...ux.intel.com -- Speaking for myself only.
--
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