From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756365AbcGHWBc (ORCPT ); Fri, 8 Jul 2016 18:01:32 -0400 Received: from merlin.infradead.org ([205.233.59.134]:37918 "EHLO merlin.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756064AbcGHWB0 (ORCPT ); Fri, 8 Jul 2016 18:01:26 -0400 Date: Sat, 9 Jul 2016 00:00:47 +0200 From: Peter Zijlstra To: Jiri Olsa Cc: mingo@kernel.org, acme@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, andi@firstfloor.org, eranian@google.com, jolsa@kernel.org, torvalds@linux-foundation.org, davidcc@google.com, alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com, namhyung@kernel.org, kan.liang@intel.com, khandual@linux.vnet.ibm.com Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 1/7] perf/x86/intel: Rework the large PEBS setup code Message-ID: <20160708220047.GK30909@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> References: <20160708133059.031522978@infradead.org> <20160708134113.290879090@infradead.org> <20160708163616.GA2392@krava> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20160708163616.GA2392@krava> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23.1 (2014-03-12) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Jul 08, 2016 at 06:36:16PM +0200, Jiri Olsa wrote: > On Fri, Jul 08, 2016 at 03:31:00PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > > SNIP > > > /* > > - * When the event is constrained enough we can use a larger > > - * threshold and run the event with less frequent PMI. > > + * Use auto-reload if possible to save a MSR write in the PMI. > > + * This must be done in pmu::start(), because PERF_EVENT_IOC_PERIOD. > > */ > > - if (hwc->flags & PERF_X86_EVENT_FREERUNNING) { > > - threshold = ds->pebs_absolute_maximum - > > - x86_pmu.max_pebs_events * x86_pmu.pebs_record_size; > > - > > - if (first_pebs) > > - perf_sched_cb_inc(event->ctx->pmu); > > - } else { > > - threshold = ds->pebs_buffer_base + x86_pmu.pebs_record_size; > > - > > - /* > > - * If not all events can use larger buffer, > > - * roll back to threshold = 1 > > - */ > > - if (!first_pebs && > > - (ds->pebs_interrupt_threshold > threshold)) > > - perf_sched_cb_dec(event->ctx->pmu); > > - } > > hum, the original code switched back the perf_sched_cb, > in case !feerunning event was detected.. I dont see it > in the new code.. just the threshold update > +static inline bool pebs_needs_sched_cb(struct cpu_hw_events *cpuc) > { > + return cpuc->n_pebs && (cpuc->n_pebs == cpuc->n_large_pebs); > +} > +static void intel_pmu_pebs_add(struct perf_event *event) > +{ > + struct cpu_hw_events *cpuc = this_cpu_ptr(&cpu_hw_events); > + struct hw_perf_event *hwc = &event->hw; > + bool needs_cb = pebs_needs_sched_cb(cpuc); > + > + cpuc->n_pebs++; > + if (hwc->flags & PERF_X86_EVENT_FREERUNNING) > + cpuc->n_large_pebs++; > + > + if (!needs_cb && pebs_needs_sched_cb(cpuc)) > + perf_sched_cb_inc(event->ctx->pmu); Ah, you're saying this, > + pebs_update_threshold(cpuc); > } > +static void intel_pmu_pebs_del(struct perf_event *event) > +{ > + struct cpu_hw_events *cpuc = this_cpu_ptr(&cpu_hw_events); > + struct hw_perf_event *hwc = &event->hw; > + bool needs_cb = pebs_needs_sched_cb(cpuc); > + > + cpuc->n_pebs--; > + if (hwc->flags & PERF_X86_EVENT_FREERUNNING) > + cpuc->n_large_pebs--; > + > + if (needs_cb && !pebs_needs_sched_cb(cpuc)) > + perf_sched_cb_dec(event->ctx->pmu); and this, should also have something like if (!needs_cb && pebs_needs_sched_cb(cpuc)) perf_sched_cb_inc(event->ctx->pmu) Because the event we just removed was the one inhibiting FREERUNNING and we can now let it rip again. Yes, you're right. Let me try and see if I can make that better. Thanks! > + > + if (cpuc->n_pebs) > + pebs_update_threshold(cpuc); > }