[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20240805091536.GJ37996@noisy.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Mon, 5 Aug 2024 11:15:36 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>
Cc: "Liang, Kan" <kan.liang@...ux.intel.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>, Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com>,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Ravi Bangoria <ravi.bangoria@....com>,
Stephane Eranian <eranian@...gle.com>,
Ian Rogers <irogers@...gle.com>, Mingwei Zhang <mizhang@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] perf/core: Optimize event reschedule for a PMU
On Sun, Aug 04, 2024 at 11:39:18PM -0700, Namhyung Kim wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 3, 2024 at 10:08 AM Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org> wrote:
> >
> > On Sat, Aug 3, 2024 at 3:32 AM Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Fri, Aug 02, 2024 at 09:11:23PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > >
> > > > But I'll have to continue staring at this later.
> > >
> > > OK, I have the below, which boots and seems able to do:
> > >
> > > perf stat -ae power/energy-pkg/ -- sleep 1
> > >
> > > and
> > >
> > > perf top
> > >
> > > also still works, so it must be perfect, right, right?
> >
> > I really hope so. :) I'll test it over the weekend.
>
> I found a failing test about the context time - it complained about
> difference in enabled vs running time of a software event.
Yeah, it's that ctx_scheD_out(EVENT_TIME) thing, that's really needed.
I'll make those changes go away when I split it all up.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists