lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2014]   [Jun]   [5]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
SubjectRe: [PATCH 9/9] perf/x86: add syfs entry to disable HT bug workaround
From
On Thu, Jun 5, 2014 at 2:59 PM, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 05, 2014 at 02:55:05PM +0200, Stephane Eranian wrote:
>> On Thu, Jun 5, 2014 at 2:50 PM, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> wrote:
>> > On Thu, Jun 05, 2014 at 12:16:01PM +0100, Matt Fleming wrote:
>> >> On 5 June 2014 11:19, Stephane Eranian <eranian@google.com> wrote:
>> >> > How would you know that you have a uniform workload from inside
>> >> > the kernel?
>> >>
>> >> That's what I'm asking you ;-)
>> >>
>> >> >> Does cpu_sibling_map not give you some indication of whether HT is
>> >> >> enabled? I think the topology_thread_cpumask() is the topology API for
>> >> >> that. But I could most definitely be wrong. Hopefully someone on the
>> >> >> Cc list will know.
>> >> >>
>> >> > Remember trying some of that, but when perf_event is initialized, those
>> >> > masks are not yet setup properly.
>> >>
>> >> Oh, bummer.
>> >
>> > So we init perf very early to get nmi-watchdog up and running, but
>> > there's no reason you cannot register a second initcall later and flip
>> > the switch from it there.
>>
>> and what initcall would that be?
>
> Pretty much anything !early_initcall() is ran after SMP bringup iirc.

Ok, we can try this. Need to check the impact on NMI watchdog if
already active.


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2014-06-05 16:01    [W:0.187 / U:1.464 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site