Re: [PATCH] arm: armv7: perf: fix armv7 ref-cycles error
On Thu, Oct 09, 2014 at 03:13:00PM +0800, zhangzhiqiang wrote: > On 2014/10/9 11:41, gre...@linuxfoundation.org wrote: > > On Thu, Oct 09, 2014 at 11:07:04AM +0800, zhangzhiqiang wrote: > >> On 2014/10/8 21:38, Will Deacon wrote: > >>> On Wed, Oct 08, 2014 at 02:31:47PM +0100, gre...@linuxfoundation.org > >>> wrote: > On Wed, Oct 08, 2014 at 10:17:41AM +0100, Will Deacon wrote: > > On Wed, Oct 08, 2014 at 04:06:12AM +0100, zhangzhiqiang wrote: > >> hi all, > >> > >> > >> ref-cycles event is specially to Intel core, but can still used in arm > >> architecture > >> with the wrong return value with 3.10 stable. for instance: > >> > >> perf stat -e ref-cycles sleep 1 > >> > >> Performance counter stats for 'sleep 1': > >> > >>0 ref-cycles > >> > >>1.002381916 seconds time elapsed > >> > >> this patch fix the bug and make it return NOT SUPPORTED > >> distinctly. > >> > >> In upstream this bug has been fixed by other way(not primary for the > >> bug), which changes more than one file > >> and more than 1000 lines. the primary commit is > >> 6b7658ec8a100b608e59e3cde353434db51f5be0. > >> besides we can not simply cherry-pick. > > > > I thought I saw Greg pick this up the other day? > > Yes, it's in 3.16.4, did I do something wrong by accepting it? > >>> > >>> Nah, it's a trivial patch that I struggle to get excited about. I'm just > >>> not > >>> sure why it's being sent again, after you already accepted it. > >> > >> Yes, it's in 3.16.4, in my opinion 3.10 need it too, can we put it into > >> 3.10 or > >> do we have the plan? > > > > Does it apply to 3.10-stable? Did you test it there and see if it > > resolves your issue? > > I have tested in 3.10.56, the bug is still existing and the patch is apply to > 3.10-stable. > Follow is the result without/with this patch based on 3.10.56. > > 3.10.56 without the patch: > bash-4.2# perf stat -e ref-cycles sleep 1 > > Performance counter stats for 'sleep 1': > > 0 ref-cycles > >1.002461500 seconds time elapsed > > 3.10.56 with the patch: > bash-4.2# perf stat -e ref-cycles sleep 1 > > Performance counter stats for 'sleep 1': > > ref-cycles > >1.002385243 seconds time elapsed Given I have no idea what the patch even does, or is supposed to be doing, I don't know how to answer this, except it looks like I shouldn't be applying this to the 3.10-stable kernel series :) sorry, greg k-h -- 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/
Re: [PATCH] arm: armv7: perf: fix armv7 ref-cycles error
On 2014/10/9 11:41, gre...@linuxfoundation.org wrote: > On Thu, Oct 09, 2014 at 11:07:04AM +0800, zhangzhiqiang wrote: >> On 2014/10/8 21:38, Will Deacon wrote: >>> On Wed, Oct 08, 2014 at 02:31:47PM +0100, gre...@linuxfoundation.org wrote: On Wed, Oct 08, 2014 at 10:17:41AM +0100, Will Deacon wrote: > On Wed, Oct 08, 2014 at 04:06:12AM +0100, zhangzhiqiang wrote: >> hi all, >> >> >> ref-cycles event is specially to Intel core, but can still used in arm >> architecture >> with the wrong return value with 3.10 stable. for instance: >> >> perf stat -e ref-cycles sleep 1 >> >> Performance counter stats for 'sleep 1': >> >> 0 ref-cycles >> >>1.002381916 seconds time elapsed >> >> this patch fix the bug and make it return NOT SUPPORTED >> distinctly. >> >> In upstream this bug has been fixed by other way(not primary for the >> bug), which changes more than one file >> and more than 1000 lines. the primary commit is >> 6b7658ec8a100b608e59e3cde353434db51f5be0. >> besides we can not simply cherry-pick. > > I thought I saw Greg pick this up the other day? Yes, it's in 3.16.4, did I do something wrong by accepting it? >>> >>> Nah, it's a trivial patch that I struggle to get excited about. I'm just not >>> sure why it's being sent again, after you already accepted it. >> >> Yes, it's in 3.16.4, in my opinion 3.10 need it too, can we put it into 3.10 >> or >> do we have the plan? > > Does it apply to 3.10-stable? Did you test it there and see if it > resolves your issue? I have tested in 3.10.56, the bug is still existing and the patch is apply to 3.10-stable. Follow is the result without/with this patch based on 3.10.56. 3.10.56 without the patch: bash-4.2# perf stat -e ref-cycles sleep 1 Performance counter stats for 'sleep 1': 0 ref-cycles 1.002461500 seconds time elapsed 3.10.56 with the patch: bash-4.2# perf stat -e ref-cycles sleep 1 Performance counter stats for 'sleep 1': ref-cycles 1.002385243 seconds time elapsed Best wishes, zhangzhiqiang -- 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/
Re: [PATCH] arm: armv7: perf: fix armv7 ref-cycles error
On 2014/10/9 11:41, gre...@linuxfoundation.org wrote: On Thu, Oct 09, 2014 at 11:07:04AM +0800, zhangzhiqiang wrote: On 2014/10/8 21:38, Will Deacon wrote: On Wed, Oct 08, 2014 at 02:31:47PM +0100, gre...@linuxfoundation.org wrote: On Wed, Oct 08, 2014 at 10:17:41AM +0100, Will Deacon wrote: On Wed, Oct 08, 2014 at 04:06:12AM +0100, zhangzhiqiang wrote: hi all, ref-cycles event is specially to Intel core, but can still used in arm architecture with the wrong return value with 3.10 stable. for instance: perf stat -e ref-cycles sleep 1 Performance counter stats for 'sleep 1': 0 ref-cycles 1.002381916 seconds time elapsed this patch fix the bug and make it return NOT SUPPORTED distinctly. In upstream this bug has been fixed by other way(not primary for the bug), which changes more than one file and more than 1000 lines. the primary commit is 6b7658ec8a100b608e59e3cde353434db51f5be0. besides we can not simply cherry-pick. I thought I saw Greg pick this up the other day? Yes, it's in 3.16.4, did I do something wrong by accepting it? Nah, it's a trivial patch that I struggle to get excited about. I'm just not sure why it's being sent again, after you already accepted it. Yes, it's in 3.16.4, in my opinion 3.10 need it too, can we put it into 3.10 or do we have the plan? Does it apply to 3.10-stable? Did you test it there and see if it resolves your issue? I have tested in 3.10.56, the bug is still existing and the patch is apply to 3.10-stable. Follow is the result without/with this patch based on 3.10.56. 3.10.56 without the patch: bash-4.2# perf stat -e ref-cycles sleep 1 Performance counter stats for 'sleep 1': 0 ref-cycles 1.002461500 seconds time elapsed 3.10.56 with the patch: bash-4.2# perf stat -e ref-cycles sleep 1 Performance counter stats for 'sleep 1': not supported ref-cycles 1.002385243 seconds time elapsed Best wishes, zhangzhiqiang -- 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/
Re: [PATCH] arm: armv7: perf: fix armv7 ref-cycles error
On Thu, Oct 09, 2014 at 03:13:00PM +0800, zhangzhiqiang wrote: On 2014/10/9 11:41, gre...@linuxfoundation.org wrote: On Thu, Oct 09, 2014 at 11:07:04AM +0800, zhangzhiqiang wrote: On 2014/10/8 21:38, Will Deacon wrote: On Wed, Oct 08, 2014 at 02:31:47PM +0100, gre...@linuxfoundation.org wrote: On Wed, Oct 08, 2014 at 10:17:41AM +0100, Will Deacon wrote: On Wed, Oct 08, 2014 at 04:06:12AM +0100, zhangzhiqiang wrote: hi all, ref-cycles event is specially to Intel core, but can still used in arm architecture with the wrong return value with 3.10 stable. for instance: perf stat -e ref-cycles sleep 1 Performance counter stats for 'sleep 1': 0 ref-cycles 1.002381916 seconds time elapsed this patch fix the bug and make it return NOT SUPPORTED distinctly. In upstream this bug has been fixed by other way(not primary for the bug), which changes more than one file and more than 1000 lines. the primary commit is 6b7658ec8a100b608e59e3cde353434db51f5be0. besides we can not simply cherry-pick. I thought I saw Greg pick this up the other day? Yes, it's in 3.16.4, did I do something wrong by accepting it? Nah, it's a trivial patch that I struggle to get excited about. I'm just not sure why it's being sent again, after you already accepted it. Yes, it's in 3.16.4, in my opinion 3.10 need it too, can we put it into 3.10 or do we have the plan? Does it apply to 3.10-stable? Did you test it there and see if it resolves your issue? I have tested in 3.10.56, the bug is still existing and the patch is apply to 3.10-stable. Follow is the result without/with this patch based on 3.10.56. 3.10.56 without the patch: bash-4.2# perf stat -e ref-cycles sleep 1 Performance counter stats for 'sleep 1': 0 ref-cycles 1.002461500 seconds time elapsed 3.10.56 with the patch: bash-4.2# perf stat -e ref-cycles sleep 1 Performance counter stats for 'sleep 1': not supported ref-cycles 1.002385243 seconds time elapsed Given I have no idea what the patch even does, or is supposed to be doing, I don't know how to answer this, except it looks like I shouldn't be applying this to the 3.10-stable kernel series :) sorry, greg k-h -- 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/
Re: [PATCH] arm: armv7: perf: fix armv7 ref-cycles error
On Thu, Oct 09, 2014 at 11:07:04AM +0800, zhangzhiqiang wrote: > On 2014/10/8 21:38, Will Deacon wrote: > > On Wed, Oct 08, 2014 at 02:31:47PM +0100, gre...@linuxfoundation.org wrote: > >> On Wed, Oct 08, 2014 at 10:17:41AM +0100, Will Deacon wrote: > >>> On Wed, Oct 08, 2014 at 04:06:12AM +0100, zhangzhiqiang wrote: > hi all, > > > ref-cycles event is specially to Intel core, but can still used in arm > architecture > with the wrong return value with 3.10 stable. for instance: > > perf stat -e ref-cycles sleep 1 > > Performance counter stats for 'sleep 1': > > 0 ref-cycles > > 1.002381916 seconds time elapsed > > this patch fix the bug and make it return NOT SUPPORTED > distinctly. > > In upstream this bug has been fixed by other way(not primary for the > bug), which changes more than one file > and more than 1000 lines. the primary commit is > 6b7658ec8a100b608e59e3cde353434db51f5be0. > besides we can not simply cherry-pick. > >>> > >>> I thought I saw Greg pick this up the other day? > >> > >> Yes, it's in 3.16.4, did I do something wrong by accepting it? > > > > Nah, it's a trivial patch that I struggle to get excited about. I'm just not > > sure why it's being sent again, after you already accepted it. > > Yes, it's in 3.16.4, in my opinion 3.10 need it too, can we put it into 3.10 > or > do we have the plan? Does it apply to 3.10-stable? Did you test it there and see if it resolves your issue? thanks, greg k-h -- 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/
Re: [PATCH] arm: armv7: perf: fix armv7 ref-cycles error
On 2014/10/8 21:38, Will Deacon wrote: > On Wed, Oct 08, 2014 at 02:31:47PM +0100, gre...@linuxfoundation.org wrote: >> On Wed, Oct 08, 2014 at 10:17:41AM +0100, Will Deacon wrote: >>> On Wed, Oct 08, 2014 at 04:06:12AM +0100, zhangzhiqiang wrote: hi all, ref-cycles event is specially to Intel core, but can still used in arm architecture with the wrong return value with 3.10 stable. for instance: perf stat -e ref-cycles sleep 1 Performance counter stats for 'sleep 1': 0 ref-cycles 1.002381916 seconds time elapsed this patch fix the bug and make it return NOT SUPPORTED distinctly. In upstream this bug has been fixed by other way(not primary for the bug), which changes more than one file and more than 1000 lines. the primary commit is 6b7658ec8a100b608e59e3cde353434db51f5be0. besides we can not simply cherry-pick. >>> >>> I thought I saw Greg pick this up the other day? >> >> Yes, it's in 3.16.4, did I do something wrong by accepting it? > > Nah, it's a trivial patch that I struggle to get excited about. I'm just not > sure why it's being sent again, after you already accepted it. Yes, it's in 3.16.4, in my opinion 3.10 need it too, can we put it into 3.10 or do we have the plan? -- 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/
Re: [PATCH] arm: armv7: perf: fix armv7 ref-cycles error
On Wed, Oct 08, 2014 at 02:31:47PM +0100, gre...@linuxfoundation.org wrote: > On Wed, Oct 08, 2014 at 10:17:41AM +0100, Will Deacon wrote: > > On Wed, Oct 08, 2014 at 04:06:12AM +0100, zhangzhiqiang wrote: > > > hi all, > > > > > > > > > ref-cycles event is specially to Intel core, but can still used in arm > > > architecture > > > with the wrong return value with 3.10 stable. for instance: > > > > > > perf stat -e ref-cycles sleep 1 > > > > > > Performance counter stats for 'sleep 1': > > > > > > 0 ref-cycles > > > > > >1.002381916 seconds time elapsed > > > > > > this patch fix the bug and make it return NOT SUPPORTED > > > distinctly. > > > > > > In upstream this bug has been fixed by other way(not primary for the > > > bug), which changes more than one file > > > and more than 1000 lines. the primary commit is > > > 6b7658ec8a100b608e59e3cde353434db51f5be0. > > > besides we can not simply cherry-pick. > > > > I thought I saw Greg pick this up the other day? > > Yes, it's in 3.16.4, did I do something wrong by accepting it? Nah, it's a trivial patch that I struggle to get excited about. I'm just not sure why it's being sent again, after you already accepted it. 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/
Re: [PATCH] arm: armv7: perf: fix armv7 ref-cycles error
On Wed, Oct 08, 2014 at 10:17:41AM +0100, Will Deacon wrote: > On Wed, Oct 08, 2014 at 04:06:12AM +0100, zhangzhiqiang wrote: > > hi all, > > > > > > ref-cycles event is specially to Intel core, but can still used in arm > > architecture > > with the wrong return value with 3.10 stable. for instance: > > > > perf stat -e ref-cycles sleep 1 > > > > Performance counter stats for 'sleep 1': > > > > 0 ref-cycles > > > >1.002381916 seconds time elapsed > > > > this patch fix the bug and make it return NOT SUPPORTED > > distinctly. > > > > In upstream this bug has been fixed by other way(not primary for the bug), > > which changes more than one file > > and more than 1000 lines. the primary commit is > > 6b7658ec8a100b608e59e3cde353434db51f5be0. > > besides we can not simply cherry-pick. > > I thought I saw Greg pick this up the other day? Yes, it's in 3.16.4, did I do something wrong by accepting it? confused, greg k-h -- 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/
Re: [PATCH] arm: armv7: perf: fix armv7 ref-cycles error
On Wed, Oct 08, 2014 at 04:06:12AM +0100, zhangzhiqiang wrote: > hi all, > > > ref-cycles event is specially to Intel core, but can still used in arm > architecture > with the wrong return value with 3.10 stable. for instance: > > perf stat -e ref-cycles sleep 1 > > Performance counter stats for 'sleep 1': > > 0 ref-cycles > >1.002381916 seconds time elapsed > > this patch fix the bug and make it return NOT SUPPORTED > distinctly. > > In upstream this bug has been fixed by other way(not primary for the bug), > which changes more than one file > and more than 1000 lines. the primary commit is > 6b7658ec8a100b608e59e3cde353434db51f5be0. > besides we can not simply cherry-pick. I thought I saw Greg pick this up the other day? 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/
Re: [PATCH] arm: armv7: perf: fix armv7 ref-cycles error
On Wed, Oct 08, 2014 at 04:06:12AM +0100, zhangzhiqiang wrote: hi all, ref-cycles event is specially to Intel core, but can still used in arm architecture with the wrong return value with 3.10 stable. for instance: perf stat -e ref-cycles sleep 1 Performance counter stats for 'sleep 1': 0 ref-cycles 1.002381916 seconds time elapsed this patch fix the bug and make it return NOT SUPPORTED distinctly. In upstream this bug has been fixed by other way(not primary for the bug), which changes more than one file and more than 1000 lines. the primary commit is 6b7658ec8a100b608e59e3cde353434db51f5be0. besides we can not simply cherry-pick. I thought I saw Greg pick this up the other day? 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/
Re: [PATCH] arm: armv7: perf: fix armv7 ref-cycles error
On Wed, Oct 08, 2014 at 10:17:41AM +0100, Will Deacon wrote: On Wed, Oct 08, 2014 at 04:06:12AM +0100, zhangzhiqiang wrote: hi all, ref-cycles event is specially to Intel core, but can still used in arm architecture with the wrong return value with 3.10 stable. for instance: perf stat -e ref-cycles sleep 1 Performance counter stats for 'sleep 1': 0 ref-cycles 1.002381916 seconds time elapsed this patch fix the bug and make it return NOT SUPPORTED distinctly. In upstream this bug has been fixed by other way(not primary for the bug), which changes more than one file and more than 1000 lines. the primary commit is 6b7658ec8a100b608e59e3cde353434db51f5be0. besides we can not simply cherry-pick. I thought I saw Greg pick this up the other day? Yes, it's in 3.16.4, did I do something wrong by accepting it? confused, greg k-h -- 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/
Re: [PATCH] arm: armv7: perf: fix armv7 ref-cycles error
On Wed, Oct 08, 2014 at 02:31:47PM +0100, gre...@linuxfoundation.org wrote: On Wed, Oct 08, 2014 at 10:17:41AM +0100, Will Deacon wrote: On Wed, Oct 08, 2014 at 04:06:12AM +0100, zhangzhiqiang wrote: hi all, ref-cycles event is specially to Intel core, but can still used in arm architecture with the wrong return value with 3.10 stable. for instance: perf stat -e ref-cycles sleep 1 Performance counter stats for 'sleep 1': 0 ref-cycles 1.002381916 seconds time elapsed this patch fix the bug and make it return NOT SUPPORTED distinctly. In upstream this bug has been fixed by other way(not primary for the bug), which changes more than one file and more than 1000 lines. the primary commit is 6b7658ec8a100b608e59e3cde353434db51f5be0. besides we can not simply cherry-pick. I thought I saw Greg pick this up the other day? Yes, it's in 3.16.4, did I do something wrong by accepting it? Nah, it's a trivial patch that I struggle to get excited about. I'm just not sure why it's being sent again, after you already accepted it. 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/
Re: [PATCH] arm: armv7: perf: fix armv7 ref-cycles error
On 2014/10/8 21:38, Will Deacon wrote: On Wed, Oct 08, 2014 at 02:31:47PM +0100, gre...@linuxfoundation.org wrote: On Wed, Oct 08, 2014 at 10:17:41AM +0100, Will Deacon wrote: On Wed, Oct 08, 2014 at 04:06:12AM +0100, zhangzhiqiang wrote: hi all, ref-cycles event is specially to Intel core, but can still used in arm architecture with the wrong return value with 3.10 stable. for instance: perf stat -e ref-cycles sleep 1 Performance counter stats for 'sleep 1': 0 ref-cycles 1.002381916 seconds time elapsed this patch fix the bug and make it return NOT SUPPORTED distinctly. In upstream this bug has been fixed by other way(not primary for the bug), which changes more than one file and more than 1000 lines. the primary commit is 6b7658ec8a100b608e59e3cde353434db51f5be0. besides we can not simply cherry-pick. I thought I saw Greg pick this up the other day? Yes, it's in 3.16.4, did I do something wrong by accepting it? Nah, it's a trivial patch that I struggle to get excited about. I'm just not sure why it's being sent again, after you already accepted it. Yes, it's in 3.16.4, in my opinion 3.10 need it too, can we put it into 3.10 or do we have the plan? -- 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/
Re: [PATCH] arm: armv7: perf: fix armv7 ref-cycles error
On Thu, Oct 09, 2014 at 11:07:04AM +0800, zhangzhiqiang wrote: On 2014/10/8 21:38, Will Deacon wrote: On Wed, Oct 08, 2014 at 02:31:47PM +0100, gre...@linuxfoundation.org wrote: On Wed, Oct 08, 2014 at 10:17:41AM +0100, Will Deacon wrote: On Wed, Oct 08, 2014 at 04:06:12AM +0100, zhangzhiqiang wrote: hi all, ref-cycles event is specially to Intel core, but can still used in arm architecture with the wrong return value with 3.10 stable. for instance: perf stat -e ref-cycles sleep 1 Performance counter stats for 'sleep 1': 0 ref-cycles 1.002381916 seconds time elapsed this patch fix the bug and make it return NOT SUPPORTED distinctly. In upstream this bug has been fixed by other way(not primary for the bug), which changes more than one file and more than 1000 lines. the primary commit is 6b7658ec8a100b608e59e3cde353434db51f5be0. besides we can not simply cherry-pick. I thought I saw Greg pick this up the other day? Yes, it's in 3.16.4, did I do something wrong by accepting it? Nah, it's a trivial patch that I struggle to get excited about. I'm just not sure why it's being sent again, after you already accepted it. Yes, it's in 3.16.4, in my opinion 3.10 need it too, can we put it into 3.10 or do we have the plan? Does it apply to 3.10-stable? Did you test it there and see if it resolves your issue? thanks, greg k-h -- 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/
