[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <3d63f8b2-c028-4cae-ad72-76378425c73a@linux.intel.com>
Date: Wed, 18 Dec 2024 11:55:53 -0500
From: "Liang, Kan" <kan.liang@...ux.intel.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc: mingo@...hat.com, acme@...nel.org, namhyung@...nel.org,
irogers@...gle.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-perf-users@...r.kernel.org, ak@...ux.intel.com, eranian@...gle.com,
dapeng1.mi@...ux.intel.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH V6 3/3] perf/x86/intel: Support PEBS counters snapshotting
On 2024-12-18 11:32 a.m., Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 18, 2024 at 07:16:43AM -0800, kan.liang@...ux.intel.com wrote:
>
>> To prevent the case that a PEBS record value might be in the past
>> relative to what is already in the event, perf always stops the PMU and
>> drains the PEBS buffer before updating the corresponding event->count.
>
> Like I wrote here:
>
> https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20241218082404.GI11133@noisy.programming.kicks-ass.net
>
> I don't think this is sufficient.
I replied with an explanation this morning in the old V5 thread. I'm not
sure if you got a chance to look at it.
https://lore.kernel.org/all/5a4ab06e-8628-4e1d-addb-2af920deffad@linux.intel.com/
There will be a drain_pebs() right before handling A-overflow-PMI.
B-assist A=1
C A=2
B-assist A=3
<- drain_pebs()
A-overflow-PMI A=4
C-assist-PMI (DS buffer) A=5
So the A-overflow-PMI will
- Process the DS. adjust A->count to 3
- adjust A->count to 4
Is it sufficient?
If not, could you please share more details?
Thanks,
Kan
Powered by blists - more mailing lists