From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Cc: Jamie Iles <jamie@jamieiles.com>,
Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Perf events/ARM
Date: Tue, 01 Dec 2009 15:40:44 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1259678444.1697.487.camel@laptop> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20091201143105.GB1183@elte.hu>
On Tue, 2009-12-01 at 15:31 +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> * Jamie Iles <jamie@jamieiles.com> wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > I'm looking at adding support for the hardware performance counters in ARMv6
> > using the new perf events framework. I have a simple setup that uses the
> > counters on their own, but wrt the perf events framework:
> >
> > - what are the requirements of set_perf_event_pending() and
> > perf_event_do_pending()? As far as I can tell from sparc/x86/powerpc,
> > set_perf_event_pending() triggers an interrupt that then calls
> > perf_event_do_pending(). Does perf_event_do_pending need to run in
> > interrupt context or could I use a soft IRQ if platforms don't have a
> > spare IRQ?
>
> softirq would be fine too i suspect - but then you need to increase the
> buffering of perf_pending_head, as multiple hardirqs could hit before
> the softirq processing has finished.
>
> As that gets complex quick, an acceptable first-order approach would be
> to just ignore those lost events and run it from a softirq - i _think_
> everything should be OK.
Things like wakeups and ->event_limit might get delayed.
Delayed wakeups can be mitigated by larger buffers, delayed disable on
->event_limit is not something you can fix up.
Does your PMU generate regular interrupts or actual NMIs? If its normal
interrupts you can simply call perf_event_do_pending() at the
pmu-interrupt tail.
x86 does a self-ipi to get from NMI context into IRQ context as fast as
possible, simply because you cannot do very much from NMI context.
> > - ARM does not have proper support for atomic64's. Other than
> > performance, would there be any known problems with using the generic
> > spinlocked atomic64's?
>
> Not a problem at all. Even performance-wise they are pretty nice - Paul
> has done a nice job hashing it along 16 spinlocks - so for small SMP
> systems there should be no global cacheline bounce.
Depends, again if your PMU generates NMIs a spinlock'ed version won't
work.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-12-01 14:40 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-12-01 12:04 Jamie Iles
2009-12-01 14:31 ` Ingo Molnar
2009-12-01 14:40 ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
2009-12-01 14:53 ` Jamie Iles
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1259678444.1697.487.camel@laptop \
--to=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=jamie@jamieiles.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=paulus@samba.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®