On 3/21/2019 5:20 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
On Thu, Mar 21, 2019 at 01:56:44PM -0700, [email protected] wrote:@@ -933,6 +1001,34 @@ pebs_update_state(bool needed_cb, struct cpu_hw_events *cpuc, struct pmu *pmu) update = true; }+ /*+ * The PEBS record doesn't shrink on the del. Because to get + * an accurate config needs to go through all the existing pebs events. + * It's not necessary. + * There is no harmful for a bigger PEBS record, except little + * performance impacts. + * Also, for most cases, the same pebs config is applied for all + * pebs events. + */ + if (x86_pmu.intel_cap.pebs_baseline && add) { + u64 pebs_data_cfg; + + /* Clear pebs_data_cfg and pebs_record_size for first PEBS. */ + if (cpuc->n_pebs == 1) { + cpuc->pebs_data_cfg = 0; + cpuc->pebs_record_size = sizeof(struct pebs_basic); + }Argh, no. This is daft. The previous site was fine, it was just the pebs_record_size assignment I'm confused about. Note how by setting ->pebs_data_cfs to 0, you force the below branch to true and call adaptive_pebs_record_size_update() ? So _why_ do you have to set pebs_record_size()?
I think we have to reset both cpuc->pebs_data_cfg and cpuc->pebs_record_size. Because pebs_update_adaptive_cfg() can return 0. If so, adaptive_pebs_record_size_update() will not be called. The cpuc->pebs_record_size still use the stale data, which may be wrong.
I think there is no difference to reset them in first add or last del. If so, I will keep the code here unchanged. I will prepare V3 to address other comments. Thanks, Kan
+ + pebs_data_cfg = pebs_update_adaptive_cfg(event); + + /* Update pebs_record_size if new event requires more data. */ + if (pebs_data_cfg & ~cpuc->pebs_data_cfg) { + cpuc->pebs_data_cfg |= pebs_data_cfg; + adaptive_pebs_record_size_update(); + update = true; + } + } + if (update) pebs_update_threshold(cpuc); }

