lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2009]   [Jul]   [8]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    SubjectRe: [patch] perf_counter: Add p6 PMU
    From
    Date
    On Wed, 2009-07-08 at 17:46 -0400, Vince Weaver wrote:
    > On Wed, 8 Jul 2009, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
    >
    > > doesn't sound like the right kind of event.. but then, it doesn't
    > > have anything better either.
    >
    > Is there a way to specify "invalid event"? Just setting it to 0 doesn't
    > work, on the Pentium Pro event 0 returns what looks like essentially
    > random numbers.

    Hmm, bugger. I was assuming writing 0 to the evensel would disable the
    counter. Apparently that only works for eventsel1, which would mean we
    cannot run counter1 without counter0. That means we'd need to do a
    counter swap at times... :/

    I think we can extend __hw_perf_counter_init() to return failure when
    ->event_map() returns 0 or something.

    > >
    > > - s/CORE_/P6_/ for the evntsel masks
    >
    > thanks, I missed that.
    >
    > > - int err;
    > > - err = checking_wrmsrl(hwc->config_base + idx,
    > > + (void)checking_wrmsrl(hwc->config_base + idx,
    >
    > the patches that do the above seem to be unrelated to p6 support.
    > Did they get mixed in somehow?

    Yeah, random cleanups..

    > The patch as it stands will break non-p6 intel perf counters, as Core2 and
    > atom are also cpu family 6. The attached patch takes the updated version
    > you sent out, and includes a fix to the detection logic.

    Ah, thanks!

    > Also the current patch gives the following warning:
    > arch/x86/kernel/cpu/perf_counter.c: In function p6_pmu_disable_counter:
    > arch/x86/kernel/cpu/perf_counter.c:925: warning: right shift count >= width of type

    #define checking_wrmsrl(msr, val) wrmsr_safe((msr), (u32)(val), \
    (u32)((val) >> 32))

    and I passed in a unsigned long, which on ia32 is well 32 bits :-)

    > though I don't see where that actually happens, unless some deep macro
    > magic is going on.
    >
    > Patch attached below. This is my first attempt at kernel development in
    > the modern era, so I have no idea how to do the signed off by if multiple
    > people are involved. Do I just put then all together?

    Yeah, that usually works..

    Thanks, I'll have a got at it tomorrow.




    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2009-07-08 23:47    [W:0.022 / U:1.584 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site