From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1757183Ab3JQPJ7 (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Thu, 17 Oct 2013 11:09:59 -0400
Received: from merlin.infradead.org ([205.233.59.134]:55829 "EHLO
	merlin.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1755705Ab3JQPJ6 (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Thu, 17 Oct 2013 11:09:58 -0400
Date: Thu, 17 Oct 2013 17:09:44 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: Don Zickus <dzickus@redhat.com>
Cc: dave.hansen@linux.intel.com, eranian@google.com, ak@linux.intel.com,
        jmario@redhat.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, acme@infradead.org,
        mingo@kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] perf, x86: Optimize intel_pmu_pebs_fixup_ip()
Message-ID: <20131017150944.GQ10651@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
References: <20131014203549.GY227855@redhat.com>
 <20131015101404.GD10651@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
 <20131015130226.GX26785@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
 <20131015143227.GY26785@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
 <20131015150736.GZ26785@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
 <20131015154104.GA227855@redhat.com>
 <20131016105755.GX10651@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
 <20131017144913.GM227855@redhat.com>
 <20131017145131.GP10651@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
 <20131017150358.GN227855@redhat.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20131017150358.GN227855@redhat.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2012-12-30)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Thu, Oct 17, 2013 at 11:03:58AM -0400, Don Zickus wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 17, 2013 at 04:51:31PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Thu, Oct 17, 2013 at 10:49:13AM -0400, Don Zickus wrote:
> > > For some reason this patch is page faulting at an invalid address inside
> > > __intel_pmu_pebs_event().
> > 
> > Ah yes, I lost a refresh, but read on; I've send a gazillion new emails
> > since ;-)
> 
> Yes, I have noticed, but I got worried when you labeled some of them with
> 'untested'. :-)  Thought I would stick to something a little more close to
> working.
> 
> > 
> > I think it was something like: s/this_cpu_ptr/this_cpu_read/ to make it
> > work again.
> 
> Thanks.  I will try some of the other pieces today (unlike yesterday).

The patches you find in:

http://programming.kicks-ass.net/sekrit/patches.tar.bz2

are actually running on my machine now.

One of the things I was considering was further shrinking the max basic
block size from 4k to maybe 1k or 512 bytes. Not sure what a sane basic
block length limit would be.

I did try 1k earlier today and I seemed to still get near 100% rewind
success rates.

Stephane, Andi, any clues?