On 12/19/2017 5:07 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 03:08:58PM -0500, Liang, Kan wrote:
This all looks very wrong... In auto reload we should never call
intel_pmu_save_and_restore() in the first place I think.
Things like x86_perf_event_update() and
On 12/19/2017 5:07 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 03:08:58PM -0500, Liang, Kan wrote:
This all looks very wrong... In auto reload we should never call
intel_pmu_save_and_restore() in the first place I think.
Things like x86_perf_event_update() and
On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 11:07:09PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 03:08:58PM -0500, Liang, Kan wrote:
> > > This all looks very wrong... In auto reload we should never call
> > > intel_pmu_save_and_restore() in the first place I think.
> > >
> > > Things like
On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 11:07:09PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 03:08:58PM -0500, Liang, Kan wrote:
> > > This all looks very wrong... In auto reload we should never call
> > > intel_pmu_save_and_restore() in the first place I think.
> > >
> > > Things like
On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 03:08:58PM -0500, Liang, Kan wrote:
> > This all looks very wrong... In auto reload we should never call
> > intel_pmu_save_and_restore() in the first place I think.
> >
> > Things like x86_perf_event_update() and x86_perf_event_set_period()
> > simply _cannot_ do the
On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 03:08:58PM -0500, Liang, Kan wrote:
> > This all looks very wrong... In auto reload we should never call
> > intel_pmu_save_and_restore() in the first place I think.
> >
> > Things like x86_perf_event_update() and x86_perf_event_set_period()
> > simply _cannot_ do the
On 12/19/2017 3:08 PM, Liang, Kan wrote:
On 12/19/2017 1:58 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
On Mon, Dec 18, 2017 at 03:34:49AM -0800, kan.li...@linux.intel.com
wrote:
arch/x86/events/core.c | 14 ++
arch/x86/events/intel/ds.c | 8 +++-
2 files changed, 21 insertions(+),
On 12/19/2017 3:08 PM, Liang, Kan wrote:
On 12/19/2017 1:58 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
On Mon, Dec 18, 2017 at 03:34:49AM -0800, kan.li...@linux.intel.com
wrote:
arch/x86/events/core.c | 14 ++
arch/x86/events/intel/ds.c | 8 +++-
2 files changed, 21 insertions(+),
On 12/19/2017 1:58 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
On Mon, Dec 18, 2017 at 03:34:49AM -0800, kan.li...@linux.intel.com wrote:
arch/x86/events/core.c | 14 ++
arch/x86/events/intel/ds.c | 8 +++-
2 files changed, 21 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git
On 12/19/2017 1:58 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
On Mon, Dec 18, 2017 at 03:34:49AM -0800, kan.li...@linux.intel.com wrote:
arch/x86/events/core.c | 14 ++
arch/x86/events/intel/ds.c | 8 +++-
2 files changed, 21 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git
On Mon, Dec 18, 2017 at 03:34:49AM -0800, kan.li...@linux.intel.com wrote:
> arch/x86/events/core.c | 14 ++
> arch/x86/events/intel/ds.c | 8 +++-
> 2 files changed, 21 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/x86/events/core.c b/arch/x86/events/core.c
> index
On Mon, Dec 18, 2017 at 03:34:49AM -0800, kan.li...@linux.intel.com wrote:
> arch/x86/events/core.c | 14 ++
> arch/x86/events/intel/ds.c | 8 +++-
> 2 files changed, 21 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/x86/events/core.c b/arch/x86/events/core.c
> index
From: Kan Liang
There is bug when mmap read event->count with large PEBS enabled.
Here is an example.
#./read_count
0x71f0
0x122c0
0x11c54
0x10001257d
0x2bdc5
There is auto-reload mechanism enabled for PEBS events in fixed period
mode. But
From: Kan Liang
There is bug when mmap read event->count with large PEBS enabled.
Here is an example.
#./read_count
0x71f0
0x122c0
0x11c54
0x10001257d
0x2bdc5
There is auto-reload mechanism enabled for PEBS events in fixed period
mode. But the calculation of
14 matches
Mail list logo