On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 2:26 PM, Peter Zijlstra <[email protected]> wrote: > On Thu, 2012-09-13 at 14:20 +0200, Stephane Eranian wrote: >> On Thu, Sep 13, 2012 at 2:16 PM, Peter Zijlstra <[email protected]> wrote: >> > On Wed, 2012-09-12 at 17:37 +0200, Stephane Eranian wrote: >> > >> >> Note however that the rotation_list is still used in >> >> perf_event_task_tick() >> >> to iterate over the ctx which needs unthrottling. We would have to switch >> >> that loop over to a for-each-pmu() which would necessary incur more >> >> iterations as it would include all the SW PMUs. >> > >> > Oh urgh, right. I think that was one of the reasons I bailed on the >> > hrtimer thing, the frequency and throttle stuff. >> > >> > ctx->nr_freq and needs_unthr could help, but yeah. >> >> I think for now, we could keep rotation list for the unthrottling. >> Multiplexing won't use rotation_list anymore. > > wouldn't that still have the problem where we take the sw-pmus off of > the rotation-list?
No because we should not use the patch I posted last week. So rotation_start() would still enqueue SW pmus. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
