Messages in this thread Patch in this message | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH] perf cgroups: Fix perf_cgroup_switch schedule in warning | From | Peter Zijlstra <> | Date | Tue, 02 Oct 2012 13:53:01 +0200 |
| |
On Tue, 2012-10-02 at 13:42 +0200, Jiri Olsa wrote: > +++ b/kernel/events/core.c > @@ -394,7 +394,8 @@ void perf_cgroup_switch(struct task_struct *task, int mode) > } > > if (mode & PERF_CGROUP_SWIN) { > - WARN_ON_ONCE(cpuctx->cgrp); > + WARN_ON_ONCE(cpuctx->cgrp && !cpuctx->ctx.is_active); > + > /* set cgrp before ctxsw in to > * allow event_filter_match() to not > * have to pass task around
OK, like you mentioned this is the result of multiple PMU being able to share a cpuctx, shouldn't we in that case avoid the second loop over the cpuctx as a whole?
Would something like the below do? IIRC I introduced that active_pmu for exactly such reasons..
--- kernel/events/core.c | 2 ++ 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+)
diff --git a/kernel/events/core.c b/kernel/events/core.c index 7b9df35..e98f014 100644 --- a/kernel/events/core.c +++ b/kernel/events/core.c @@ -372,6 +372,8 @@ void perf_cgroup_switch(struct task_struct *task, int mode) list_for_each_entry_rcu(pmu, &pmus, entry) { cpuctx = this_cpu_ptr(pmu->pmu_cpu_context); + if (cpuctx->active_pmu != pmu) + continue; /* * perf_cgroup_events says at least one
| |