From: Nilay Vaish <nilayvaish@gmail.com>
To: David Carrillo-Cisneros <davidcc@google.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Cc: "x86@kernel.org" <x86@kernel.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com>, Kan Liang <kan.liang@intel.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Vegard Nossum <vegard.nossum@gmail.com>,
Paul Turner <pjt@google.com>,
Stephane Eranian <eranian@google.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/4] perf/core: introduce PMU_EV_CAP_READ_ACTIVE_PKG
Date: Sun, 7 Aug 2016 14:10:31 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <9b29b625-d019-6671-5676-3c58a31a6d3f@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1470539577-102094-4-git-send-email-davidcc@google.com>
On 08/06/16 22:12, David Carrillo-Cisneros wrote:
> diff --git a/kernel/events/core.c b/kernel/events/core.c
> index 34049cc..77f1bd3 100644
> --- a/kernel/events/core.c
> +++ b/kernel/events/core.c
> @@ -3333,6 +3333,26 @@ struct perf_read_data {
> int ret;
> };
>
> +static int find_cpu_to_read(struct perf_event *event)
> +{
> + bool active = event->state == PERF_EVENT_STATE_ACTIVE;
> + int event_cpu = event->oncpu, local_cpu = smp_processor_id();
> + u16 local_pkg, event_pkg;
> +
> + if (!active)
> + return -1;
> +
> + if (event->group_caps & PERF_EV_CAP_READ_ACTIVE_PKG) {
> + event_pkg = topology_physical_package_id(event_cpu);
> + local_pkg = topology_physical_package_id(local_cpu);
> +
> + if (event_pkg == local_pkg)
> + return local_cpu;
> + }
> +
> + return event_cpu;
> +}
> +
> /*
> * Cross CPU call to read the hardware event
> */
> @@ -3454,19 +3474,17 @@ u64 perf_event_read_local(struct perf_event *event)
>
> static int perf_event_read(struct perf_event *event, bool group)
> {
> - int ret = 0;
> + int ret = 0, cpu_to_read;
>
> - /*
> - * If event is enabled and currently active on a CPU, update the
> - * value in the event structure:
> - */
> - if (event->state == PERF_EVENT_STATE_ACTIVE) {
> + cpu_to_read = find_cpu_to_read(event);
> +
> + if (cpu_to_read >= 0) {
> struct perf_read_data data = {
> .event = event,
> .group = group,
> .ret = 0,
> };
> - ret = smp_call_function_single(event->oncpu,
> + ret = smp_call_function_single(cpu_to_read,
> __perf_event_read, &data, 1);
> ret = ret ? : data.ret;
> } else if (event->state == PERF_EVENT_STATE_INACTIVE) {
>
I would like to suggest a small change to this patch. I think the check
on PERF_EVENT_STATE_ACTIVE should be retained in the perf_event_read()
function. The new function should assume that the event is active. I
find this more readable since the next check in function
perf_event_read() is on PERF_EVENT_STATE_INACTIVE.
Diff below:
+static int find_cpu_to_read(struct perf_event *event)
+{
+ int event_cpu = event->oncpu, local_cpu = smp_processor_id();
+ u16 local_pkg, event_pkg;
+
+ if (event->group_caps & PERF_EV_CAP_READ_ACTIVE_PKG) {
+ event_pkg = topology_physical_package_id(event_cpu);
+ local_pkg = topology_physical_package_id(local_cpu);
+
+ if (event_pkg == local_pkg)
+ return local_cpu;
+ }
+
+ return event_cpu;
+}
+
/*
* Cross CPU call to read the hardware event
*/
@@ -3477,17 +3493,15 @@ static int perf_event_read(struct perf_event
*event, bool group)
{
int ret = 0;
- /*
- * If event is enabled and currently active on a CPU, update the
- * value in the event structure:
- */
- if (event->state == PERF_EVENT_STATE_ACTIVE) {
+ if (event->state == PERF_EVENT_STATE_ACTIVE) {
+ int cpu_to_read = find_cpu_to_read(event);
+
struct perf_read_data data = {
.event = event,
.group = group,
.ret = 0,
};
- ret = smp_call_function_single(event->oncpu,
+ ret = smp_call_function_single(cpu_to_read,
__perf_event_read,
&data, 1);
ret = ret ? : data.ret;
} else if (event->state == PERF_EVENT_STATE_INACTIVE) {
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-08-07 19:10 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-08-07 3:12 [PATCH v2 0/4] remove unnecessary IPI reading uncore events David Carrillo-Cisneros
2016-08-07 3:12 ` [PATCH v2 1/4] perf/core: check return value of perf_event_read IPI David Carrillo-Cisneros
2016-08-10 11:04 ` Ingo Molnar
2016-08-17 20:53 ` David Carrillo-Cisneros
2016-08-07 3:12 ` [PATCH v2 2/4] perf/core: generalize event->group_flags David Carrillo-Cisneros
2016-08-07 3:12 ` [PATCH v2 3/4] perf/core: introduce PMU_EV_CAP_READ_ACTIVE_PKG David Carrillo-Cisneros
2016-08-07 19:10 ` Nilay Vaish [this message]
2016-08-07 20:10 ` David Carrillo-Cisneros
2016-08-08 16:12 ` Nilay Vaish
2016-08-09 5:04 ` David Carrillo-Cisneros
2016-08-09 22:28 ` [PATCH " David Carrillo-Cisneros
2016-08-10 18:27 ` Nilay Vaish
2016-08-08 10:00 ` [PATCH v3 " David Carrillo-Cisneros
2016-08-07 3:12 ` [PATCH v2 4/4] perf/x86: use PMUEF_READ_CPU_PKG in uncore events David Carrillo-Cisneros
2016-08-10 18:30 ` [PATCH v2 0/4] remove unnecessary IPI reading " Nilay Vaish
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=9b29b625-d019-6671-5676-3c58a31a6d3f@gmail.com \
--to=nilayvaish@gmail.com \
--cc=ak@linux.intel.com \
--cc=davidcc@google.com \
--cc=eranian@google.com \
--cc=kan.liang@intel.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=pjt@google.com \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=vegard.nossum@gmail.com \
--cc=x86@kernel.org \
/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®