[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <170637928210.816351.6189596994646336873.b4-ty@kernel.org>
Date: Sat, 27 Jan 2024 10:16:47 -0800
From: Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>
To: Kan Liang <kan.liang@...ux.intel.com>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
Weilin Wang <weilin.wang@...el.com>,
Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@...el.com>,
linux-perf-users@...r.kernel.org,
Ian Rogers <irogers@...gle.com>,
James Clark <james.clark@....com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Samantha Alt <samantha.alt@...el.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com>,
Caleb Biggers <caleb.biggers@...el.com>,
Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...nel.org>,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Edward Baker <edward.baker@...el.com>,
Perry Taylor <perry.taylor@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1] perf pmu: Treat the msr pmu as software
On Wed, 24 Jan 2024 15:42:00 -0800, Ian Rogers wrote:
> The msr PMU is a software one, meaning msr events may be grouped
> with events in a hardware context. As the msr PMU isn't marked as a
> software PMU by perf_pmu__is_software, groups with the msr PMU in
> are broken and the msr events placed in a different group. This
> may lead to multiplexing errors where a hardware event isn't
> counted while the msr event, such as tsc, is. Fix all of this by
> marking the msr PMU as software, which agrees with the driver.
>
> [...]
Applied to perf-tools-next, thanks!
Best regards,
--
Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists