lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2015]   [Dec]   [11]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH v0 3/5] perf: Introduce instruction trace filtering
On Fri, Dec 11, 2015 at 05:01:36PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 11, 2015 at 05:48:03PM +0200, Alexander Shishkin wrote:
>
> > > We can always call the validation thing, we must not call the program
> > > thing !ACTIVE is a clear and simple rule.
> >
> > Ah, but pmu::itrace_filter_setup() does not touch the hardware,
> > pmu::start() does. The former keeps an array of, say, MSR values ready
> > for programming in event::hw and the latter actually writes the MSRs. So
> > the above example should not be a problem.
> >
> > So in a way validation and programming are split already. And PT, for
> > example, won't have it any other way, you can only program stuff into
> > the registers while tracing is disabled.
>
> Yes, I just read that in the last patch. If however we fold the whole
> stop/start bits into it, that fails again.
>
> Hmm.. lemme ponder a bit.

Nope, it doesn't matter. Either way around you need serialization.

Because while, as proposed, pmu::itrace_filter_setup() does not modify
the hardware state, it does modify event state. So it needs to be
serialized against concurrent pmu::add().




\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2015-12-11 18:21    [W:0.060 / U:0.728 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site