mirror of https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: tip-bot for Vince Weaver <vweaver1@eecs.utk.edu>
To: linux-tip-commits@vger.kernel.org
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, hpa@zytor.com, mingo@kernel.org,
	a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl, tglx@linutronix.de,
	vweaver1@eecs.utk.edu
Subject: [tip:perf/core] perf/x86: Use rdpmc() rather than rdmsr() when possible in the kernel
Date: Wed, 6 Jun 2012 09:17:02 -0700	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <tip-c48b60538c3ba05a7a2713c4791b25405525431b@git.kernel.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.2.00.1203011724030.26934@cl320.eecs.utk.edu>

Commit-ID:  c48b60538c3ba05a7a2713c4791b25405525431b
Gitweb:     http://git.kernel.org/tip/c48b60538c3ba05a7a2713c4791b25405525431b
Author:     Vince Weaver <vweaver1@eecs.utk.edu>
AuthorDate: Thu, 1 Mar 2012 17:28:14 -0500
Committer:  Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
CommitDate: Wed, 6 Jun 2012 17:23:35 +0200

perf/x86: Use rdpmc() rather than rdmsr() when possible in the kernel

The rdpmc instruction is faster than the equivelant rdmsr call,
so use it when possible in the kernel.

The perfctr kernel patches did this, after extensive testing showed
rdpmc to always be faster (One can look in etc/costs in the perfctr-2.6
package to see a historical list of the overhead).

I have done some tests on a 3.2 kernel, the kernel module I used
was included in the first posting of this patch:

                   rdmsr           rdpmc
 Core2 T9900:      203.9 cycles     30.9 cycles
 AMD fam0fh:        56.2 cycles      9.8 cycles
 Atom 6/28/2:      129.7 cycles     50.6 cycles

The speedup of using rdpmc is large.

[ It's probably possible (and desirable) to do this without
  requiring a new field in the hw_perf_event structure, but
  the fixed events make this tricky. ]

Signed-off-by: Vince Weaver <vweaver1@eecs.utk.edu>
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/alpine.DEB.2.00.1203011724030.26934@cl320.eecs.utk.edu
Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
---
 arch/x86/kernel/cpu/perf_event.c |    4 +++-
 include/linux/perf_event.h       |    1 +
 2 files changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-)

diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/perf_event.c b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/perf_event.c
index 43c2017..000a474 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/perf_event.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/perf_event.c
@@ -75,7 +75,7 @@ u64 x86_perf_event_update(struct perf_event *event)
 	 */
 again:
 	prev_raw_count = local64_read(&hwc->prev_count);
-	rdmsrl(hwc->event_base, new_raw_count);
+	rdpmcl(hwc->event_base_rdpmc, new_raw_count);
 
 	if (local64_cmpxchg(&hwc->prev_count, prev_raw_count,
 					new_raw_count) != prev_raw_count)
@@ -819,9 +819,11 @@ static inline void x86_assign_hw_event(struct perf_event *event,
 	} else if (hwc->idx >= X86_PMC_IDX_FIXED) {
 		hwc->config_base = MSR_ARCH_PERFMON_FIXED_CTR_CTRL;
 		hwc->event_base = MSR_ARCH_PERFMON_FIXED_CTR0 + (hwc->idx - X86_PMC_IDX_FIXED);
+		hwc->event_base_rdpmc = (hwc->idx - X86_PMC_IDX_FIXED) | 1<<30;
 	} else {
 		hwc->config_base = x86_pmu_config_addr(hwc->idx);
 		hwc->event_base  = x86_pmu_event_addr(hwc->idx);
+		hwc->event_base_rdpmc = x86_pmu_addr_offset(hwc->idx);
 	}
 }
 
diff --git a/include/linux/perf_event.h b/include/linux/perf_event.h
index 45db49f..1ce887a 100644
--- a/include/linux/perf_event.h
+++ b/include/linux/perf_event.h
@@ -677,6 +677,7 @@ struct hw_perf_event {
 			u64		last_tag;
 			unsigned long	config_base;
 			unsigned long	event_base;
+			int		event_base_rdpmc;
 			int		idx;
 			int		last_cpu;
 

  reply	other threads:[~2012-06-06 16:17 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2012-03-01 22:28 [PATCH] perf_event use rdpmc rather than rdmsr when possible in kernel Vince Weaver
2012-06-06 16:17 ` tip-bot for Vince Weaver [this message]
2012-06-15 17:43   ` [PATCH] perf, amd: Fix rdpmc index calculation for AMD family 15h Robert Richter

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=tip-c48b60538c3ba05a7a2713c4791b25405525431b@git.kernel.org \
    --to=vweaver1@eecs.utk.edu \
    --cc=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
    --cc=hpa@zytor.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-tip-commits@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@kernel.org \
    --cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
    /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®