lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2015]   [Jan]   [9]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 11/11] perf/x86/intel: Enable conflicting event scheduling for CQM
On Thu, 08 Jan, at 12:51:17PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 14, 2014 at 09:15:12PM +0000, Matt Fleming wrote:
> > +/*
> > + * Deallocate the RMIDs from any events that conflict with @event, and
> > + * place them on the back of the group list.
> > + */
> > +static void intel_cqm_sched_out_events(struct perf_event *event)
> > +{
> > + struct perf_event *group, *g;
> > + unsigned int rmid;
> >
> > + lockdep_assert_held(&cache_mutex);
> > +
> > + list_for_each_entry_safe(group, g, &cache_groups, hw.cqm_groups_entry) {
> > + if (group == event)
> > + continue;
> > +
> > + rmid = group->hw.cqm_rmid;
> > +
> > + /*
> > + * Skip events that don't have a valid RMID.
> > + */
> > + if (!__rmid_valid(rmid))
> > + continue;
> > +
> > + /*
> > + * No conflict? No problem! Leave the event alone.
> > + */
> > + if (!__conflict_event(group, event))
> > + continue;
> > +
> > + intel_cqm_xchg_rmid(group, INVALID_RMID);
> > + __put_rmid(rmid);
> > +
> > + list_move_tail(&group->hw.cqm_groups_entry, &cache_groups);
> > + }
> > }
>
> I'm not sure about that list_move_tail() there, is wrecks the rotation
> order and would cause conflicting events to get less than their 'fair'
> share I suspect.

Good point, this is just plain wrong.

--
Matt Fleming, Intel Open Source Technology Center


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2015-01-09 15:41    [W:0.193 / U:0.500 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site