[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20161108150949.GM26852@two.firstfloor.org>
Date: Tue, 8 Nov 2016 07:09:49 -0800
From: Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...nel.org>, Vince Weaver <vince@...ter.net>,
Robert Richter <rric@...nel.org>,
lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>, kan.liang@...el.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] perf/x86: Fix overlap counter scheduling bug
Adding Kan who actually maintains the uncore drivers these days.
> Which is two distinct groups, only one of which has overlap. And the one
> with overlap only has 2 overlapping masks, giving a max reties of 1.
Looks reasonable to limit the mask.
Are we sure this problem isn't in the other 0xc masks too ?
-Andi
>
>
> diff --git a/arch/x86/events/intel/uncore_snbep.c b/arch/x86/events/intel/uncore_snbep.c
> index 272427700d48..71bc348736bd 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/events/intel/uncore_snbep.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/events/intel/uncore_snbep.c
> @@ -669,7 +669,7 @@ static struct event_constraint snbep_uncore_cbox_constraints[] = {
> UNCORE_EVENT_CONSTRAINT(0x1c, 0xc),
> UNCORE_EVENT_CONSTRAINT(0x1d, 0xc),
> UNCORE_EVENT_CONSTRAINT(0x1e, 0xc),
> - EVENT_CONSTRAINT_OVERLAP(0x1f, 0xe, 0xff),
> + UNCORE_EVENT_CONSTRAINT(0x1f, 0xc); /* should be 0x0e but that gives scheduling pain */
> UNCORE_EVENT_CONSTRAINT(0x21, 0x3),
> UNCORE_EVENT_CONSTRAINT(0x23, 0x3),
> UNCORE_EVENT_CONSTRAINT(0x31, 0x3),
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists