lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2009]   [Jul]   [5]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [PATCH 4/6 -tip] perf_counter: Add Generalized Hardware interrupt support for AMD
From
Date
On Sun, 2009-07-05 at 03:11 +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> * Jaswinder Singh Rajput <jaswinder@kernel.org> wrote:
>
> > On Sat, 2009-07-04 at 12:22 +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > > * Jaswinder Singh Rajput <jaswinder@kernel.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > > On Wed, 2009-07-01 at 13:24 +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > > > > * Jaswinder Singh Rajput <jaswinder@kernel.org> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > $ ./perf stat -e interrupts -e masked -e int-pending-mask-cycles -- ls -lR /usr/include/ > /dev/null
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Performance counter stats for 'ls -lR /usr/include/':
> > > > > >
> > > > > > 377 interrupts
> > > > > > 53429936 int-mask-cycles
> > > > > > 1119 int-pending-mask-cycles
> > > > > >
> > > > > > 0.371457539 seconds time elapsed
> > > > >
> > > > > Agreed, this is another useful generalization - and the 'cycles
> > > > > pending' metrics are not retrievable via any software means.
> > > > >
> > > > > We could and should probably add a software counter for hardirqs
> > > > > as wel. That would allow the vector/irqnr information to be
> > > > > passed in, and it would allow architectures without irq metrics
> > > > > in the PMU to have this counter too.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > Please let me know that addition of software counter will be
> > > > in this patch or we can do it incrementally after this patch.
> > >
> > > It should be in this series. That way we can cross-check whether
> > > the soft counts and the hard counts match up and find potential
> > > bugs that way, etc.
> > >
> >
> > You want to cross check performance counter events ?
>
> Yes. The events are also more complete if we add per IRQ source
> counts as well, not just summary counts.
>

If you ask me about 'complete', I will say :
"No-one is 'complete' except God".

Let me know what you mean by 'complete' and 'more complete'.

This is a hardware performance interrupt event patch.
If you want to add IRQ source, of course you can add it in another
patch, it is a never ending task.

I do not understand why you behave like this :

1. Is today the last day of the creation.
2. Or you will not collect any further patches.

Of course answer is "no" then what is the problem with you.

Stop this complete-ness madness. You will never complete atleast in this
life no matter what you will do.

Thanks,
--
JSR



\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2009-07-05 06:43    [from the cache]
©2003-2011 Jasper Spaans. Advertise on this site