mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Robert Richter <robert.richter@amd.com>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	oprofile-list <oprofile-list@lists.sourceforge.net>,
	Robert Richter <robert.richter@amd.com>,
	Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org>
Subject: [PATCH 2/2] oprofile: Remove 'WQ on CPUx, prefer CPUy' warning
Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2012 20:53:31 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <1345834411-24940-3-git-send-email-robert.richter@amd.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1345834411-24940-1-git-send-email-robert.richter@amd.com>

Under certain workloads we see the following warnings:

 WQ on CPU0, prefer CPU1
 WQ on CPU0, prefer CPU2
 WQ on CPU0, prefer CPU3

It warns the user that the wq to access a per-cpu buffers runs not on
the same cpu. This happens if the wq is rescheduled on a different cpu
than where the buffer is located. This was probably implemented to
detect performance issues. Not sure if there actually is one as the
buffers are copied to a single buffer anyway which should be the
actual bottleneck.

We wont change WQ implementation. Since a user can do nothing the
warning is pointless. Removing it.

Cc: Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org>
Signed-off-by: Robert Richter <robert.richter@amd.com>
---
 drivers/oprofile/cpu_buffer.c |   11 +++--------
 1 files changed, 3 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/oprofile/cpu_buffer.c b/drivers/oprofile/cpu_buffer.c
index b8ef8dd..8aa73fa 100644
--- a/drivers/oprofile/cpu_buffer.c
+++ b/drivers/oprofile/cpu_buffer.c
@@ -451,14 +451,9 @@ static void wq_sync_buffer(struct work_struct *work)
 {
 	struct oprofile_cpu_buffer *b =
 		container_of(work, struct oprofile_cpu_buffer, work.work);
-	if (b->cpu != smp_processor_id()) {
-		printk(KERN_DEBUG "WQ on CPU%d, prefer CPU%d\n",
-		       smp_processor_id(), b->cpu);
-
-		if (!cpu_online(b->cpu)) {
-			cancel_delayed_work(&b->work);
-			return;
-		}
+	if (b->cpu != smp_processor_id() && !cpu_online(b->cpu)) {
+		cancel_delayed_work(&b->work);
+		return;
 	}
 	sync_buffer(b->cpu);
 
-- 
1.7.8.6



  parent reply	other threads:[~2012-08-24 18:54 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2012-08-24 18:53 [PATCH 0/2] oprofile fixes and updates Robert Richter
2012-08-24 18:53 ` [PATCH 1/2] oprofile, s390: Fix uninitialized memory access when writing to oprofilefs Robert Richter
2012-08-24 18:53 ` Robert Richter [this message]
2012-08-27 16:08   ` [PATCH 2/2] oprofile: Remove 'WQ on CPUx, prefer CPUy' warning Andi Kleen

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=1345834411-24940-3-git-send-email-robert.richter@amd.com \
    --to=robert.richter@amd.com \
    --cc=andi@firstfloor.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@kernel.org \
    --cc=oprofile-list@lists.sourceforge.net \
    /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

Powered by JetHome