On Tue, 2011-11-08 at 14:49 +0200, Gleb Natapov wrote:
> > It might make sense to introduce cpuid10_ebx or so, also I think the
> cpuid10_ebx will have only one field though (event_mask).
>
> > At the very least add a full ebx iteration to disable unsupported events
> > in the intel-v1 case.
> I do not understand what do you mean here, cpuid10_ebx was introduced by
> intel v1 architectural PMU so it should already contain correct information.
I meant something like the below
---
arch/x86/include/asm/perf_event.h | 13 +++++++++++++
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/perf_event.c | 3 +++
arch/x86/kernel/cpu/perf_event_intel.c | 21 ++++++++++++++++++---
3 files changed, 34 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/arch/x86/include/asm/perf_event.h
b/arch/x86/include/asm/perf_event.h
index f61c62f..98e397a 100644
--- a/arch/x86/include/asm/perf_event.h
+++ b/arch/x86/include/asm/perf_event.h
@@ -72,6 +72,19 @@ union cpuid10_eax {
unsigned int full;
};
+union cpuid10_ebx {
+ struct {
+ unsigned int unhalted_core_cycles:1;
+ unsigned int instructions_retired:1;
+ unsigned int unhalted_reference_cycles:1;
+ unsigned int llc_reference:1;
+ unsigned int llc_misses:1;
+ unsigned int branch_instruction_retired:1;
+ unsigned int branch_misses_retired:1;
+ } split;
+ unsigned int full;
+};
+
union cpuid10_edx {
struct {
unsigned int num_counters_fixed:5;
diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/perf_event.c b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/perf_event.c
index 6408910..e4fdb9d 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/perf_event.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/perf_event.c
@@ -336,6 +336,9 @@ int x86_setup_perfctr(struct perf_event *event)
if (config == -1LL)
return -EINVAL;
+ if (config == -2LL)
+ return -EOPNOTSUPP;
+
/*
* Branch tracing:
*/
diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/perf_event_intel.c
b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/perf_event_intel.c
index e09ca20..aaaed9a 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/perf_event_intel.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/perf_event_intel.c
@@ -1547,9 +1547,9 @@ static void intel_clovertown_quirks(void)
__init int intel_pmu_init(void)
{
union cpuid10_edx edx;
+ union cpuid10_ebx ebx;
union cpuid10_eax eax;
unsigned int unused;
- unsigned int ebx;
int version;
if (!cpu_has(&boot_cpu_data, X86_FEATURE_ARCH_PERFMON)) {
@@ -1566,7 +1566,7 @@ __init int intel_pmu_init(void)
* Check whether the Architectural PerfMon supports
* Branch Misses Retired hw_event or not.
*/
- cpuid(10, &eax.full, &ebx, &unused, &edx.full);
+ cpuid(10, &eax.full, &ebx.full, &unused, &edx.full);
if (eax.split.mask_length <= ARCH_PERFMON_BRANCH_MISSES_RETIRED)
return -ENODEV;
@@ -1598,6 +1598,21 @@ __init int intel_pmu_init(void)
x86_pmu.intel_cap.capabilities = capabilities;
}
+ if (!ebx.split.unhalted_core_cycles)
+ intel_perfmon_event_map[PERF_COUNT_HW_CPU_CYCLES] = -2;
+ if (!ebx.split.instructions_retired)
+ intel_perfmon_event_map[PERF_COUNT_HW_INSTRUCTIONS] = -2;
+ if (!ebx.split.unhalted_reference_cycles)
+ intel_perfmon_event_map[PERF_COUNT_HW_BUS_CYCLES] = -2;
+ if (!ebx.split.llc_reference)
+ intel_perfmon_event_map[PERF_COUNT_HW_CACHE_REFERENCES] = -2;
+ if (!ebx.split.llc_misses)
+ intel_perfmon_event_map[PERF_COUNT_HW_CACHE_MISSES] = -2;
+ if (!ebx.split.branch_instruction_retired)
+ intel_perfmon_event_map[PERF_COUNT_HW_BRANCH_INSTRUCTIONS] = -2;
+ if (!ebx.split.branch_misses_retired)
+ intel_perfmon_event_map[PERF_COUNT_HW_BRANCH_MISSES] = -2;
+
intel_ds_init();
/*
@@ -1643,7 +1658,7 @@ __init int intel_pmu_init(void)
/* UOPS_EXECUTED.CORE_ACTIVE_CYCLES,c=1,i=1 */
intel_perfmon_event_map[PERF_COUNT_HW_STALLED_CYCLES_BACKEND] =
0x1803fb1;
- if (ebx & 0x40) {
+ if (ebx.split.branch_misses_retired) {
/*
* Erratum AAJ80 detected, we work it around by using
* the BR_MISP_EXEC.ANY event. This will over-count
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
