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 S1752579AbdFSP1P (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
        Mon, 19 Jun 2017 11:27:15 -0400
Received: from mga04.intel.com ([192.55.52.120]:54069 "EHLO mga04.intel.com"
        rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
        id S1753254AbdFSPV5 (ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
        Mon, 19 Jun 2017 11:21:57 -0400
X-ExtLoop1: 1
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.39,361,1493708400"; 
   d="scan'208";a="982640819"
Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2017 08:21:51 -0700
From: Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com>
To: Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>
Cc: Alexey Budankov <alexey.budankov@linux.intel.com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
        Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@kernel.org>,
        Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com>,
        Kan Liang <kan.liang@intel.com>,
        Dmitri Prokhorov <Dmitry.Prohorov@intel.com>,
        Valery Cherepennikov <valery.cherepennikov@intel.com>,
        David Carrillo-Cisneros <davidcc@google.com>,
        Stephane Eranian <eranian@google.com>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 1/n] perf/core: addressing 4x slowdown during
 per-process profiling of STREAM benchmark on Intel Xeon Phi
Message-ID: <20170619152151.GB23705@tassilo.jf.intel.com>
References: <09226446-39b9-9bd2-d60f-b9bb947987c5@linux.intel.com>
 <20170615195618.GA8807@leverpostej>
 <07a76338-4c71-569a-d36e-7d6bcd10bd74@linux.intel.com>
 <20170616090938.GB20092@leverpostej>
 <f918eb9b-d856-a3ee-a76b-0aeca8141554@linux.intel.com>
 <22a2dafb-de05-199b-54ed-0c3b24349826@linux.intel.com>
 <20170619124639.GA3661@leverpostej>
 <20170619133831.GB3894@leverpostej>
 <20170619145908.GA23705@tassilo.jf.intel.com>
 <20170619150939.GA4555@leverpostej>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20170619150939.GA4555@leverpostej>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.8.0 (2017-02-23)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

> I was trying to get a feel for how that compares to what we can do
> today. For other reasons (e.g. fd exhaustion), opening NR_CPUS * n

You just have to increase the fd limit. The 1024 fd default is just
archaic for larger systems and doesn't really make any sense because
it only controls very small amounts of kernel memory.

> events might not be a great idea on systems with a huge number of CPUs.
> We might want a heuristic in the perf tool regardless.

But there's no alternative: we have to measure all CPUs with all events.

-andi