[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAM9d7ch9cFpe3YzDhKhK0sRMn9pZ3RL+_ONCVB52s+EJgcRdqw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 11 Oct 2023 09:14:42 -0700
From: Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>
To: Ian Rogers <irogers@...gle.com>
Cc: Mingwei Zhang <mizhang@...gle.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com>,
Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...nel.org>,
Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@...el.com>,
Kan Liang <kan.liang@...ux.intel.com>,
linux-perf-users@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Yang Jihong <yangjihong1@...wei.com>,
Stephane Eranian <eranian@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1] perf evlist: Avoid frequency mode for the dummy event
On Tue, Oct 3, 2023 at 4:02 PM Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Oct 3, 2023 at 3:36 PM Ian Rogers <irogers@...gle.com> wrote:
> > With the PMU disabled, isn't there still a risk of an interrupt still
> > being in flight? In other words the disable doesn't prevent a race and
> > we'll catch this on the next timer call to
> > perf_adjust_freq_unthr_context. I think we can also improve the code
> > by just disabling a PMU once, we can take advantage of the
> > perf_event_pmu_context and disable that PMU, iterate its events and
> > then re-enable the PMU - i.e. no need for an enable and disable per
> > event. I'll put a patch together.
>
> Thanks, I was thinking about that too. It's also a side effect of
> the context rewrite. Maybe we could iterate pmu_ctx's active lists
> and skip pmus with PERF_PMU_CAP_NO_INTERRUPT and
> individual non-sampling events.
Or we can add pmu_ctx->nr_freq and check it before accessing
pmu MSRs.
Thanks,
Namhyung
Powered by blists - more mailing lists