On Sat, Jul 09, 2016 at 12:00:47AM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> Yes, you're right. Let me try and see if I can make that better.

Something like so?

---
--- a/arch/x86/events/intel/ds.c
+++ b/arch/x86/events/intel/ds.c
@@ -831,6 +831,18 @@ static inline void pebs_update_threshold
        ds->pebs_interrupt_threshold = threshold;
 }
 
+static void pebs_update_state(bool needs_cb, struct cpu_hw_events *cpuc, 
struct pmu *pmu)
+{
+       if (needs_cb != pebs_needs_sched_cb(cpuc)) {
+               if (!needs_cb)
+                       perf_sched_cb_inc(pmu);
+               else
+                       perf_sched_cb_dec(pmu);
+
+               pebs_update_threshold(cpuc);
+       }
+}
+
 static void intel_pmu_pebs_add(struct perf_event *event)
 {
        struct cpu_hw_events *cpuc = this_cpu_ptr(&cpu_hw_events);
@@ -841,10 +853,7 @@ static void intel_pmu_pebs_add(struct pe
        if (hwc->flags & PERF_X86_EVENT_FREERUNNING)
                cpuc->n_large_pebs++;
 
-       if (!needs_cb && pebs_needs_sched_cb(cpuc))
-               perf_sched_cb_inc(event->ctx->pmu);
-
-       pebs_update_threshold(cpuc);
+       pebs_update_state(needs_cb, cpuc, event->ctx->pmu);
 }
 
 void intel_pmu_pebs_enable(struct perf_event *event)
@@ -884,11 +893,7 @@ static void intel_pmu_pebs_del(struct pe
        if (hwc->flags & PERF_X86_EVENT_FREERUNNING)
                cpuc->n_large_pebs--;
 
-       if (needs_cb && !pebs_needs_sched_cb(cpuc))
-               perf_sched_cb_dec(event->ctx->pmu);
-
-       if (cpuc->n_pebs)
-               pebs_update_threshold(cpuc);
+       pebs_update_state(needs_cb, cpuc, event->ctx->pmu);
 }
 
 void intel_pmu_pebs_disable(struct perf_event *event)

Reply via email to