Hi Peter, On Tue, 2015-08-18 at 19:52 +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Wed, Aug 05, 2015 at 06:13:29PM +0300, Alexey Brodkin wrote: > > Even though this hardware implementation allows for more flexibility, > > in Linux kernel we decided to mimic behavior of other architectures this > > way: > > > > [1] Set limit value as half of counter's max value (to allow counter to > > run after reaching it limit, see below for more explanation): > > ---------->8----------- > > arc_pmu->max_period = (1ULL << counter_size) / 2 - 1ULL; > > ---------->8----------- > > > @@ -317,10 +365,11 @@ static int arc_pmu_device_probe(struct > > platform_device *pdev) > > return -ENOMEM; > > > > arc_pmu->n_counters = pct_bcr.c; > > - arc_pmu->counter_size = 32 + (pct_bcr.s << 4); > > + counter_size = 32 + (pct_bcr.s << 4); > > + arc_pmu->max_period = (1ULL << counter_size) - 1ULL; > > > > I don't see that /2 there..
My comment was a bit too early. That "/2" was actually introduced in the subsequent commit. Do you think I need to do a re-spin of that patch with commit message which matches real code (i.e. no "/2")? -Alexey-- 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/
