[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <566AB36D.9050209@arm.com>
Date: Fri, 11 Dec 2015 11:28:45 +0000
From: "Suzuki K. Poulose" <Suzuki.Poulose@....com>
To: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>
Cc: linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org, punit.agrawal@....com,
arm@...nel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCHv3 5/5] arm-cci: CCI-500: Work around PMU counter writes
On 10/12/15 15:42, Mark Rutland wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 17, 2015 at 06:03:27PM +0000, Suzuki K. Poulose wrote:
>> The CCI PMU driver sets the event counter to the half of the maximum
>> value(2^31) it can count before we start the counters via
>> pmu_event_set_period(). This is done to give us the best chance to
>> handle the overflow interrupt, taking care of extreme interrupt latencies.
>
> This should work, but it seems very heavyweight given we do it for each
> write.
>
> Can we not amortize this by using the {start,commit,cancel}_txn hooks?
>
> Either we can handle 1-4 and 6-8 in those, or we can copy everything
> into a shadow state and apply it all in one go at commit_txn time.
I took a look at it. The only worrying part is, if pmu->add() will be
called outside *_txn().
from linux/perf_event.h:
/*
* Adds/Removes a counter to/from the PMU, can be done inside a
* transaction, see the ->*_txn() methods.
*
As of now it is only called within the transactions, but the comment somehow
doesn't look like enforces it.
Thoughts ?
Suzuki
--
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