On Sat, 2010-01-30 at 00:08 +0100, Stephane Eranian wrote:
> I think there is a problem with this following code:
>
> void hw_perf_enable(void)
> for (i = 0; i < cpuc->n_events; i++) {
>
> event = cpuc->event_list[i];
> hwc = &event->hw;
>
> if (hwc->idx == -1 || hwc->idx == cpuc->assign[i])
> continue;
>
> Here you are looking for events which are moving. I think the 2nd
> part of the if is not good enough. It is not because hwc->idx is
> identical to the assignment, that you can assume the event was
> already there. It may have been there in the past, then scheduled
> out and replaced at idx by another event. When it comes back,
> it gets its spot back, but it needs to be reprogrammed.
>
> That is why in v6 incremental, I have added last_cpu, last_tag
> to have a stronger checks and match_prev_assignment().
>
> Somehow it is missing in the series you've committed unless
> I am missing something.
Right, that went missing because I was assuming that was for the
optimization of reducing to one loop. And since I didn't see that one
loop version work I left that part out.
(The risk of doing more than one thing in one patch)
Still, shouldn't be hard to correct, I'll look at doing a patch for this
on monday, unless you beat me to it :-)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Planet: dedicated and managed hosting, cloud storage, colocation
Stay online with enterprise data centers and the best network in the business
Choose flexible plans and management services without long-term contracts
Personal 24x7 support from experience hosting pros just a phone call away.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/theplanet-com
_______________________________________________
perfmon2-devel mailing list
perfmon2-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/perfmon2-devel
