On 03/10/19 19:20, Jim Mattson wrote:
> You've truncated the list I originally provided, so I think this need
> only go to MSR_ARCH_PERFMON_PERFCTR0 + 17. Otherwise, we could lose
> some valuable MSRs.

This is v2, so it was meant to replace the patch that truncates the
list.  But I can include the other one too, perhaps even ask the x86
maintainers about decreasing INTEL_PMC_MAX_GENERIC to 18.

>> +                       if (msrs_to_save[i] - MSR_ARCH_PERFMON_PERFCTR0 >=
>> +                           min(INTEL_PMC_MAX_GENERIC, 
>> x86_pmu.num_counters_gp))
> Why involve INTEL_PMC_MAX_GENERIC here?

It's not really necessary, but I wanted to imitate how intel_pmu_refresh
initializes pmu->nr_arch_gp_counters.

Paolo

>> +                               continue;
>> +                       break;
>> +               case MSR_ARCH_PERFMON_EVENTSEL0 ... 
>> MSR_ARCH_PERFMON_EVENTSEL0 + 31:
> Same as the two comments above.
>> +                       if (msrs_to_save[i] - MSR_ARCH_PERFMON_EVENTSEL0 >=
>> +                           min(INTEL_PMC_MAX_GENERIC, 
>> x86_pmu.num_counters_gp))
>> +                               continue;

Reply via email to