mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Michael Ellerman <mpe@ellerman.id.au>
To: Ravi Bangoria <ravi.bangoria@linux.ibm.com>,
	linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
Cc: benh@kernel.crashing.org, paulus@samba.org,
	ebiederm@xmission.com, muriloo@linux.ibm.com,
	christophe.leroy@c-s.fr, npiggin@gmail.com, leitao@debian.org,
	aneesh.kumar@linux.vnet.ibm.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	naveen.n.rao@linux.vnet.ibm.com,
	Ravi Bangoria <ravi.bangoria@linux.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Powerpc/perf: Wire up PMI throttling
Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2018 23:43:39 +1100	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <8736s2v7d0.fsf@concordia.ellerman.id.au> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20181114141425.1892-1-ravi.bangoria@linux.ibm.com>

Ravi Bangoria <ravi.bangoria@linux.ibm.com> writes:

> Commit 14c63f17b1fde ("perf: Drop sample rate when sampling is too
> slow") introduced a way to throttle PMU interrupts if we're spending
> too much time just processing those. Wire up powerpc PMI handler to
> use this infrastructure.

To be clear we have throttling of the *rate* of interrupts, but this
adds throttling based on the *time taken* to process the interrupts. Or
at least that's my understanding?

> diff --git a/arch/powerpc/kernel/traps.c b/arch/powerpc/kernel/traps.c
> index 9a86572db1ef..44f85fa22356 100644
> --- a/arch/powerpc/kernel/traps.c
> +++ b/arch/powerpc/kernel/traps.c
> @@ -18,6 +18,7 @@
>  #include <linux/errno.h>
>  #include <linux/sched.h>
>  #include <linux/sched/debug.h>
> +#include <linux/sched/clock.h>
>  #include <linux/kernel.h>
>  #include <linux/mm.h>
>  #include <linux/pkeys.h>
> @@ -1803,9 +1804,12 @@ void vsx_unavailable_tm(struct pt_regs *regs)
>  
>  void performance_monitor_exception(struct pt_regs *regs)
>  {
> +	u64 start_clock;
>  	__this_cpu_inc(irq_stat.pmu_irqs);
>  
> +	start_clock = sched_clock();
>  	perf_irq(regs);
> +	perf_sample_event_took(sched_clock() - start_clock);
>  }

Despite the name, perf_irq() may not actually be the perf IRQ handler :)

It's a function pointer which might call perf or might call oprofile, or
a dummy handler.

I don't think we should be calling perf_sample_event_took() if we're not
actually using perf, that is wasteful at best.

So the timing logic should go in the perf specific handler I think.
ie. perf_event_interrupt().

cheers

  reply	other threads:[~2018-11-15 12:43 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2018-11-14 14:14 Ravi Bangoria
2018-11-15 12:43 ` Michael Ellerman [this message]
2018-11-16  9:56   ` Ravi Bangoria

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=8736s2v7d0.fsf@concordia.ellerman.id.au \
    --to=mpe@ellerman.id.au \
    --cc=aneesh.kumar@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=benh@kernel.crashing.org \
    --cc=christophe.leroy@c-s.fr \
    --cc=ebiederm@xmission.com \
    --cc=leitao@debian.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org \
    --cc=muriloo@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=naveen.n.rao@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
    --cc=npiggin@gmail.com \
    --cc=paulus@samba.org \
    --cc=ravi.bangoria@linux.ibm.com \
    /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®