[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <201991b2-d77a-c10f-d46d-ee9b34ba11e5@maine.edu>
Date: Thu, 15 Aug 2024 15:01:42 -0400 (EDT)
From: Vince Weaver <vincent.weaver@...ne.edu>
To: "Liang, Kan" <kan.liang@...ux.intel.com>
cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>, Li Huafei <lihuafei1@...wei.com>,
peterz@...radead.org, mingo@...hat.com, acme@...nel.org,
namhyung@...nel.org, mark.rutland@....com,
alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com, jolsa@...nel.org, irogers@...gle.com,
adrian.hunter@...el.com, bp@...en8.de, dave.hansen@...ux.intel.com,
x86@...nel.org, hpa@...or.com, linux-perf-users@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>,
Vince Weaver <vincent.weaver@...ne.edu>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] perf/x86/intel: Restrict period on Haswell
On Thu, 15 Aug 2024, Liang, Kan wrote:
> I also found a related discussion about 9 years ago.
> https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/alpine.DEB.2.11.1505181343090.32481@vincent-weaver-1.umelst.maine.edu/
> Vince tried the workaround but it seems not work.
>
> So limiting the min period of the fixed counter 0 to 32 seems the only
> workaround for now.
I'm actually still lurking on this discussion. My regular fuzzing machine
is still a Haswell machine (the same one from 9 years ago) and it reliably
hits this issue within hours. I hadn't realized there was an official
reproducer.
If a patch does come out of this I'll be glad to test it.
Vince Weaver
vincent.weaver@...ne.edu
Powered by blists - more mailing lists