[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <2228A2BE-E34C-4D8D-9271-8EE8A5C83121@fb.com>
Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2018 18:24:23 +0000
From: Song Liu <songliubraving@...com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
CC: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"acme@...nel.org" <acme@...nel.org>,
"alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com"
<alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com>,
"jolsa@...hat.com" <jolsa@...hat.com>,
"eranian@...gle.com" <eranian@...gle.com>,
"tglx@...utronix.de" <tglx@...utronix.de>,
"alexey.budankov@...ux.intel.com" <alexey.budankov@...ux.intel.com>,
"mark.rutland@....com" <mark.rutland@....com>,
"megha.dey@...el.com" <megha.dey@...el.com>,
"frederic@...nel.org" <frederic@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH] perf: Rewrite core context handling
> On Oct 16, 2018, at 11:10 AM, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Oct 16, 2018 at 04:34:05PM +0000, Song Liu wrote:
>>>> 3. perf_event_pmu_context owns RB tree of events. Since we don't
>>>> need rotation across multiple hardware PMUs, the rotation is
>>>> within same perf_event_pmu_context.
>>>
>>> By keeping the RB trees in perf_event_context, we get bigger trees,
>>> which is more efficient (log(n+m) < log(n) + log(m))
>>>
>>> Also, specifically, it means we only need a single merge sort /
>>> iteration to schedule in a full context, instead of (again) doing 'n' of
>>> them.
>>>
>>> Also, given a context and a pmu, it is cheaper for finding the relevant
>>> events; this is needed for big.little for instance. Something the
>>> proposed patch doesn't fully flesh out.
>>
>> Would it be faster if we add a perf_event_pmu_context pointer to the
>> perf_event?
>
> + pmu_ctx = find_get_pmu_context(pmu, ctx, event);
> + if (IS_ERR(pmu_ctx)) {
> + err = PTR_ERR(pmu_ctx);
> + goto err_locked;
> + }
> + event->pmu_ctx = pmu_ctx;
>
> Like that?
Aha, we already have it. I misunderstood this one. Please ignore that.
Thanks,
Song
Powered by blists - more mailing lists