Denis:
I have reviewed the change and agree to it. Thanks for catching that.
Carl Love
Denis Kirjanov
dkirja...@hera.k
On Sun, 2009-01-11 at 10:31 +1100, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
On Thu, 2009-01-08 at 16:26 -0800, Carl Love wrote:
I pulled down the git tree, compiled and installed it. I tested it
against the OProfile testsuite, which includes SPU event profiling
tests. Everything passed. The patch
!
Arnd
Thanks guys for all your help on the patches.
Carl Love
___
Linuxppc-dev mailing list
Linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org
https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
On Thu, 2009-01-08 at 16:48 +0100, Robert Richter wrote:
On 01.12.08 16:18:26, Carl Love wrote:
This is a rework of the previously posted set of patches.
Patch 1 is the user level patch to add the SPU events to the user
OProfile tool.
Patch 2 is a kernel patch to do code clean up
On Tue, 2008-12-02 at 12:02 +1100, Michael Ellerman wrote:
On Mon, 2008-12-01 at 16:18 -0800, Carl Love wrote:
This patch adds the SPU event profiling support for the IBM Cell
processor to the list of available events. The opcontrol script
patches include a test to see if there is a new
no functional changes.
Patch 3 is a kernel patch to add the SPU event profiling support.
Carl Love
___
Linuxppc-dev mailing list
Linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org
https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
.
Signed-off-by: Carl Love [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Index: oprofile-cvs/events/ppc64/cell-be/events
===
--- oprofile-cvs.orig/events/ppc64/cell-be/events
+++ oprofile-cvs/events/ppc64/cell-be/events
@@ -108,12 +108,42 @@ event:0xdbe
This patch restructures and cleans up the code a bit to make it
easier to add new functionality later. The patch makes no
functional changes to the existing code.
Signed-off-by: Carl Love [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Index: Cell_kernel_11_10_2008/arch/powerpc/oprofile/op_model_cell.c
of the user tool patch for SPU event profiling.
Signed-off-by: Carl Love [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Index: Cell_kernel_11_10_2008-new-patches/arch/powerpc/oprofile/op_model_cell.c
===
---
Cell_kernel_11_10_2008-new-patches.orig/arch/powerpc
On Tue, 2008-11-25 at 17:00 +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
On Tuesday 25 November 2008, Carl Love wrote:
This patch set consists of two kernel patches and one user level patch
to add SPU event based profiling support to OProfile for the IBM Cell
processor. The first patch in the series
On Tue, 2008-11-25 at 16:58 +0100, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
snip
struct pmc_cntrl_data {
unsigned long vcntr;
@@ -111,6 +126,8 @@ struct pm_cntrl {
u16 trace_mode;
u16 freeze;
u16 count_mode;
+ u16 spu_addr_trace;
+ u8 trace_buf_ovflw;
};
static
This patch adds the SPU events for the IBM Cell processor to the
list of available events to the user level tool.
Signed-off-by: Carl Love [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Index: oprofile-0.9.4/events/ppc64/cell-be/events
===
--- oprofile-0.9.4
This patch basically rearranges the code a bit to make it easier to
just add the needed SPU event based profiling routines. The second
kernel patch contains the new spu event based profiling code.
Signed-off-by: Carl Love [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Index: Cell_kernel_11_10_2008/arch/powerpc/oprofile
This is the second of the two kernel patches for adding SPU profiling
for the IBM Cell processor. This patch contains the spu event profiling
setup, start and stop routines.
Signed-off-by: Carl Love [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Index: Cell_kernel_11_10_2008/arch/powerpc/oprofile/op_model_cell.c
of the arrays.
The size of the pm_signal_local array should be equal to the
number of SPUs being configured in the array. Currently, the
array is of size 4 (NR_PHYS_CTRS) but being indexed by a for
loop from 0 to 7 (NUM_SPUS_PER_NODE).
Signed-off-by: Carl Love [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Index
The size of the pm_signal_local array should be equal to the
number of SPUs being configured in the call. Currently, the
array is of size 4 (NR_PHYS_CTRS) but being indexed by a for
loop from 0 to 7 (NUM_SPUS_PER_NODE).
Signed-off-by: Carl Love [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Index
On Thu, 2008-08-21 at 20:20 +1000, Michael Ellerman wrote:
On Thu, 2008-08-21 at 10:14 +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
On Thursday 21 August 2008, Paul Mackerras wrote:
Arnd Bergmann writes:
Paul, any chance we can still get this into 2.6.27?
Possibly. We'll need a really good
to keep it, how about marking it as
__deprecated?
No, since this is broken by design we remove it. The patch can go
upstream as it is.
Thanks,
-Robert
It really is best to remove it. Thank you for taking the time to review
and comment on the patch.
Carl Love
them out again for his review on oprofile-list.
Arnd
Sorry, my mistake. I did mean to post both patches to the OProfile list
as well. I was planning on following up with Robert on the patches this
week since I had not heard from him.
Carl Love
On Fri, 2008-08-08 at 18:08 +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
On Friday 01 August 2008, Carl Love wrote:
The issue is the SPU code is not holding the kernel mutex lock while
adding samples to the kernel buffer.
Thanks for your patch, and sorry for not replying earlier.
It looks good from
of the oprofile add_event_entry() is removed as it
is no longer needed given this patch.
Note, this patch has not addressed the issue of indexing arrays
by the spu number. This still needs to be fixed as the spu
numbering is not guarenteed to be 0 to max_num_spus-1.
Signed-off-by: Carl Love [EMAIL
prevent the call to delete buffers that don't exist.
Signed-off-by: Carl Love [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Index: Cell_kernel_6_26_2008/drivers/oprofile/cpu_buffer.c
===
--- Cell_kernel_6_26_2008.orig/drivers/oprofile/cpu_buffer.c
as it
is no longer needed given this patch.
Note, this patch has not addressed the issue of indexing arrays
by the spu number. This still needs to be fixed as the spu
numbering is not guarenteed to be 0 to max_num_spus-1.
Signed-off-by: Carl Love [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Signed-off-by: Maynard Johnson
that don't exist.
Signed-off-by: Carl Love [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Index: Cell_kernel_6_26_2008/drivers/oprofile/cpu_buffer.c
===
--- Cell_kernel_6_26_2008.orig/drivers/oprofile/cpu_buffer.c
+++ Cell_kernel_6_26_2008/drivers/oprofile
On Tue, 2008-06-10 at 10:30 +1000, Michael Ellerman wrote:
On Tue, 2008-06-10 at 09:41 +1000, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote:
On Mon, 2008-06-09 at 16:26 -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
From: Carl Love [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Fix the 64 bit user code backtrace which currently may hang
On Fri, 2008-05-16 at 16:22 +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
On Thursday 15 May 2008, Carl Love wrote:
On Thu, 2008-05-15 at 17:39 +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
I noticed now that you are indexing arrays by SPU number. This is not
a good idea, because you make assumptions about the system
On Thu, 2008-05-15 at 11:01 -0700, Carl Love wrote:
On Thu, 2008-05-15 at 20:47 +1000, Paul Mackerras wrote:
Carl Love writes:
The following patch fixes the 64 bit user code backtrace
which currently may hang the system.
What exactly is wrong with it?
Having now taken
worked.
Carl Love
___
Linuxppc-dev mailing list
Linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org
https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
On Thu, 2008-05-15 at 20:47 +1000, Paul Mackerras wrote:
Carl Love writes:
The following patch fixes the 64 bit user code backtrace
which currently may hang the system.
What exactly is wrong with it?
Having now taken a much closer look, I now don't think Nate Case's
patch
On Thu, 2008-05-15 at 17:39 +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
On Thursday 01 May 2008, Carl Love wrote:
Finally, this patch backs out the changes previously added to the
oprofile generic code for handling the architecture specific
ops.sync_start and ops.sync_stop that allowed
On Thu, 2008-05-08 at 09:48 +0200, Jochen Roth wrote:
Unable to handle kernel paging request for data at address
0xd04fe9a8
Faulting instruction address: 0xd0330ad8
cpu 0x0: Vector: 300 (Data Access) at [c0003c337680]
pc: d0330ad8:
On Wed, 2008-05-07 at 18:54 +0200, Jochen Roth wrote:
Carl,
I applied your patch on Jeremy's latest kernel.org spufs tree.
+void oprofile_add_value(unsigned long value, int cpu) {
+ struct oprofile_cpu_buffer * cpu_buf = cpu_buffer[cpu];
Shouldn't it be
struct
The following patch fixes the 64 bit user code backtrace
which currently may hang the system.
Signed-off-by: Carl Love [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Index: linux-2.6.25.1/arch/powerpc/oprofile/backtrace.c
===
--- linux-2.6.25.1.orig/arch
specific
ops.sync_start and ops.sync_stop that allowed the architecture
to skip the per CPU buffer creation.
Signed-off-by: Carl Love [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Index: Cell_kernel_4_15_2008/arch/powerpc/oprofile/cell/pr_util.h
that allowed the architecture
to skip the per CPU buffer creation.
Signed-off-by: Carl Love [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Index: Cell_kernel_4_15_2008/arch/powerpc/oprofile/cell/pr_util.h
===
--- Cell_kernel_4_15_2008.orig/arch/powerpc/oprofile/cell
that allowed the architecture
to skip the per CPU buffer creation.
Signed-off-by: Carl Love [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Index: Cell_kernel_4_15_2008/arch/powerpc/oprofile/cell/pr_util.h
===
--- Cell_kernel_4_15_2008.orig/arch/powerpc/oprofile/cell
On Fri, 2008-04-04 at 08:38 +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
On Wednesday 02 April 2008, Carl Love wrote:
On Wed, 2008-04-02 at 07:21 +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
On Tuesday 25 March 2008, Carl Love wrote:
This patch fixes a bug in the code that records the SPU data and
context switches
On Wed, 2008-04-02 at 07:21 +0200, Arnd Bergmann wrote:
On Tuesday 25 March 2008, Carl Love wrote:
This patch fixes a bug in the code that records the SPU data and
context switches. The buffer_mutex lock must be held when the
kernel is adding data to the buffer between the kernel
queues. The data to
be passed to the daemon is caputured by the interrupt handler.
The workqueue function is invoked to grab the buffer_mutex lock
and add the data to the buffer.
Signed-off-by: Carl Love [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Index: linux-2.6.25-rc4/arch/powerpc/oprofile/cell/spu_profiler.c
39 matches
Mail list logo
