[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20180920141150.GY24124@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2018 16:11:50 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Reinette Chatre <reinette.chatre@...el.com>
Cc: tglx@...utronix.de, fenghua.yu@...el.com, tony.luck@...el.com,
mingo@...hat.com, acme@...nel.org, gavin.hindman@...el.com,
jithu.joseph@...el.com, dave.hansen@...el.com, hpa@...or.com,
x86@...nel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH V5 0/6] perf and x86/intel_rdt: Fix lack of coordination
with perf
On Wed, Sep 19, 2018 at 10:29:05AM -0700, Reinette Chatre wrote:
> Reinette Chatre (6):
> perf/core: Add sanity check to deal with pinned event failure
> perf/x86: Add helper to obtain performance counter index
> x86/intel_rdt: Remove local register variables
> x86/intel_rdt: Create required perf event attributes
> x86/intel_rdt: Use perf infrastructure for measurements
> x86/intel_rdt: Re-enable pseudo-lock measurements
>
> Documentation/x86/intel_rdt_ui.txt | 22 +-
> arch/x86/events/core.c | 21 ++
> arch/x86/include/asm/perf_event.h | 1 +
> arch/x86/kernel/cpu/intel_rdt_pseudo_lock.c | 372 ++++++++++++--------
> kernel/events/core.c | 6 +
> 5 files changed, 261 insertions(+), 161 deletions(-)
Yeah, these look good, thanks!
Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@...radead.org>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists