[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <c857acbf-432e-a9ee-923c-dabc0559a2ff@linux.intel.com>
Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2021 06:12:04 -0700
From: Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>
To: Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>,
Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Stephane Eranian <eranian@...gle.com>,
Ian Rogers <irogers@...gle.com>, gmx@...gle.com
Subject: Re: [RFC] perf/core: Add an ioctl to get a number of lost samples
> diff --git a/include/linux/perf_event.h b/include/linux/perf_event.h
> index f5a6a2f069ed..44d72079c77a 100644
> --- a/include/linux/perf_event.h
> +++ b/include/linux/perf_event.h
> @@ -756,6 +756,8 @@ struct perf_event {
> struct pid_namespace *ns;
> u64 id;
>
> + atomic_t lost_samples;
Would rather use atomic64_t. atomic_t might wrap too quickly.
But it might be better to put it somewhere where you already have a lock
on the event, then you wouldn't need an atomic.
-Andi
Powered by blists - more mailing lists