lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2010]   [Mar]   [11]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [RFC] x86,perf: Implement minimal P4 PMU driver v14
From
Date
On Fri, 2010-03-12 at 00:31 +0300, Cyrill Gorcunov wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 11, 2010 at 10:24:22PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Fri, 2010-03-12 at 00:15 +0300, Cyrill Gorcunov wrote:
> >
> > > Perhaps something like the patch below (tested with kvm)? With this patch
> > > we will actually waste ~4/8 bytes per PMU (intel,amd,p6) since this call
> > > hits on p4 only, so I think perhaps better to use one x86 scheduler hook
> > > instead of empty schedule_events() in PMU, hmm?
> > > ---
> > >
> > > x86,perf: Fix NULL deref on not assigned x86_pmu
> > >
> > > In case of not assigned x86_pmu and software events
> > > NULL dereference may being hit via x86_pmu::schedule_events
> > > method.
> > >
> > > Fix it by calling x86_pmu::schedule_events only if we
> > > have one. Otherwise use general scheduler.
> > >
> > > Also the former x86_schedule_events calls restored.
> >
> > Hrm,.. not sure that makes sense, sure it might not crash anymore, but
> > its not making much sense to compute anything if we don't have an
> > initialized x86_pmu.
> >
> > Doesn't adding something like:
> >
> > if (!x86_pmu_initialized())
> > return;
> >
> > to hw_perf_group_sched_in() make more sense? We seem to do that for all
> > these weak things except this one.
> >
>
> As far as I see it'll not update tstamp_running then (in x86_event_sched_in).
> Or I miss somethig?

Have it return 0 and it will fallback to defaults. Since there is no
initialized x86_pmu there's no point in doing anything x86 specific.



\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2010-03-11 22:41    [W:0.050 / U:6.384 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site