lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2015]   [Jul]   [17]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
Date
SubjectRe: [PATCH 2/9] perf/x86: core_misc PMU disable and enable support
On Fri, Jul 17, 2015 at 8:35 AM, Liang, Kan <kan.liang@intel.com> wrote:
>
>
>> On Fri, Jul 17, 2015 at 03:46:29PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>> > On Fri, Jul 17, 2015 at 01:11:41PM +0100, Mark Rutland wrote:
>> > > > diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/perf_event_intel.c
>> > > > b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/perf_event_intel.c
>> > > > index b9826a9..651a86d 100644
>> > > > --- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/perf_event_intel.c
>> > > > +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/perf_event_intel.c
>> > > > @@ -1586,6 +1586,8 @@ static int intel_pmu_handle_irq(struct
>> pt_regs *regs)
>> > > > if (!x86_pmu.late_ack)
>> > > > apic_write(APIC_LVTPC, APIC_DM_NMI);
>> > > > __intel_pmu_disable_all();
>> > > > + if (cpuc->core_misc_active_mask)
>> > > > + intel_core_misc_pmu_disable();
>> > >
>> > > Huh? Free running counters have nothing to do with the PMU
>> > > interrupt; there's nothing they can do to trigger it. This feels very hacky.
>> > >
>> > > If this is necessary, surely it should live in __intel_pmu_disable_all?
>> > >
>> > > [...]
>> >
>> > Yeah this is crazy. It should not live in the regular PMU at all, not
>> > be Intel specific.
>>
>> lkml.kernel.org/r/2c37309d20afadf88ad4a82cf0ce02b9152801e2.143025615
>> 4.git.luto@kernel.org
>>
>> That does the right thing for free running MSRs.
>>
>> Take it and expand.
>
> The first patch did the similar thing as the link you shared with.
> Here is the first patch.
> https://lkml.org/lkml/2015/7/16/953
>
> This patch is expend the per-core core_misc PMU based on the first patch.
> I implemented this patch is because that one of the biggest concern
> from upstream for mix PMU group is that it breaks group semantics.
> When one PMU is stop, the other PMU is still running.
> So I introduce the enable/disable function. Other PMUs can discard the counter
> value for core_misc event when they are stop or in irq.
>
> If you think it should not live in the regular PMU, I can just remove the codes.
> We just keep core_misc event running and no harm in it.

I know very little about perf pmu organization, but I think that AMD
supports APERF and MPERF, too, so it may make sense to have that thing
live outside a file with "intel" in the name.

Also, should the driver detect those using the cpuid bit?

--Andy


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2015-07-17 19:21    [W:0.103 / U:0.028 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site