[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAP045AofEjymHDOHOZGvEQN+hUS-MQMBiVpySQKoJ5ZGzDSoqA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2017 08:32:34 -0700
From: Kyle Huey <me@...ehuey.com>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
Cc: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>, gregkh@...uxfoundation.org,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Vince Weaver <vincent.weaver@...ne.edu>,
"Jin, Yao" <yao.jin@...ux.intel.com>, stable@...r.kernel.org,
Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com>,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...hat.com>,
Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>,
Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>,
Stephane Eranian <eranian@...gle.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, acme@...nel.org,
jolsa@...nel.org, kan.liang@...el.com,
Will Deacon <will.deacon@....com>,
open list <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"Robert O'Callahan" <robert@...llahan.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] perf/core: generate overflow signal when samples are
dropped (WAS: Re: [REGRESSION] perf/core: PMU interrupts dropped if we
entered the kernel in the "skid" region)
On Tue, Jul 11, 2017 at 2:03 AM, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org> wrote:
>
> * Kyle Huey <me@...ehuey.com> wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Jul 5, 2017 at 10:07 PM, Robert O'Callahan <robert@...llahan.org> wrote:
>> > On Tue, Jul 4, 2017 at 3:21 AM, Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com> wrote:
>> >> Should any of those be moved into the "should be dropped" pile?
>> >
>> > Why not be conservative and clear every sample you're not sure about?
>> >
>> > We'd appreciate a fix sooner rather than later here, since rr is
>> > currently broken on every stable Linux kernel and our attempts to
>> > implement a workaround have failed.
>> >
>> > (We have separate "interrupt" and "measure" counters, and I thought we
>> > might work around this regression by programming the "interrupt"
>> > counter to count kernel events as well as user events (interrupting
>> > early is OK), but that caused our (completely separate) "measure"
>> > counter to report off-by-one results (!), which seems to be a
>> > different bug present on a range of older kernels.)
>>
>> This seems to have stalled out here unfortunately.
>>
>> Can we get a consensus (from ingo or peterz?) on Mark's question? Or,
>> alternatively, can we move the patch at the top of this thread forward
>> on the stable branches until we do reach an answer to that question?
>>
>> We've abandoned hope of working around this problem in rr and are
>> currently broken for all of our users with an up-to-date kernel, so
>> the situation for us is rather dire at the moment I'm afraid.
>
> Sorry about that - I've queued up a revert for the original commit and will send
> the fix to Linus later today. I've added a -stable tag as well so it can be
> forwarded to Greg the moment it hits upstream.
Great, thank you.
- Kyle
Powered by blists - more mailing lists