Hi Vince,
On Thu, Jan 09, 2014 at 03:47:19AM +0000, Vince Weaver wrote:
> On Wed, 8 Jan 2014, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>
> > On Wed, Jan 08, 2014 at 04:28:20PM -0500, Vince Weaver wrote:
> > > Should the perf_event interface handle setups like this better and work
> > > fine in aggregate mode but return ENOTSUP if a sampled or overflow event
> > > is attempted?
> >
> > Yeah that would be better, we do something similar for P6 class machines
> > without lapic IIRC.
>
> You're right. Something like the following works for me on the rasp-pi,
> although maybe if x86 is doing it too things should be moved up into
> generic code?
I'd rather see it in the generic code if at all possible. Maybe we could add
a flags field to perf_pmu_register?
> Return EOPNOTSUPP if we have no PMU overflow interrupt but a
> sampled event is requested.
>
> Signed-off-by: Vince Weaver <vincent.wea...@maine.edu>
>
> diff --git a/arch/arm/include/asm/pmu.h b/arch/arm/include/asm/pmu.h
> index f24edad..f1f27a3 100644
> --- a/arch/arm/include/asm/pmu.h
> +++ b/arch/arm/include/asm/pmu.h
> @@ -87,6 +87,7 @@ struct arm_pmu {
> u64 max_period;
> struct platform_device *plat_device;
> struct pmu_hw_events *(*get_hw_events)(void);
> + int no_overflow_interrupt;
For the arm bits, we can actually use platform_get_irq on the platform
device and avoid the need for a new field in here.
Cheers,
Will
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
