On Wed, 2012-10-17 at 11:35 -0400, Vince Weaver wrote:
>
> This is by accident; it looks like the code does
>val |= ARCH_PERFMON_EVENTSEL_ENABLE;
> in p6_pmu_disable_event() so that events are never truly disabled
> (is this a bug? should it be &=~ instead?).
I think that's on purpose..
On Wed, 2012-10-17 at 11:35 -0400, Vince Weaver wrote:
This is by accident; it looks like the code does
val |= ARCH_PERFMON_EVENTSEL_ENABLE;
in p6_pmu_disable_event() so that events are never truly disabled
(is this a bug? should it be =~ instead?).
I think that's on purpose.. from
Hello
quick summary: the p6 code looks to be buggy and is only currently
working by luck. I'm trying to work out how to best fix the KNC
code which is based on the p6 PMU driver.
While working on the KNC PMU we ran into the following problem.
Between 2.6.33 and 2.6.34 the kernel was
Hello
quick summary: the p6 code looks to be buggy and is only currently
working by luck. I'm trying to work out how to best fix the KNC
code which is based on the p6 PMU driver.
While working on the KNC PMU we ran into the following problem.
Between 2.6.33 and 2.6.34 the kernel was
4 matches
Mail list logo
