From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754000Ab3HaPm0 (ORCPT ); Sat, 31 Aug 2013 11:42:26 -0400 Received: from one.firstfloor.org ([193.170.194.197]:36053 "EHLO one.firstfloor.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753287Ab3HaPmZ (ORCPT ); Sat, 31 Aug 2013 11:42:25 -0400 Date: Sat, 31 Aug 2013 17:42:23 +0200 From: Andi Kleen To: Peter Zijlstra Cc: Andi Kleen , Andi Kleen , mingo@kernel.org, acme@infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/4] perf, x86: Avoid checkpointed counters causing excessive TSX aborts v4 Message-ID: <20130831154223.GD19750@two.firstfloor.org> References: <1377128846-977-1-git-send-email-andi@firstfloor.org> <1377128846-977-2-git-send-email-andi@firstfloor.org> <20130830160215.GU31370@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> <20130830204445.GF16724@tassilo.jf.intel.com> <20130831150755.GY31370@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20130831150755.GY31370@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > > So can just drop the XXX comment. Ok? > > How about hiding the entire thing in a hsw function. I'm fairly sure > that eventually we'll need to check all counters for this nonsense. AFAIK there are no plans to do so. > > Something like so perhaps? It's ok for me, except it's not for TSX (that's intx), but only for intx_checkpointed. Should I send a new patch? -Andi