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 S1754405AbbC0Q5y (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Fri, 27 Mar 2015 12:57:54 -0400
Received: from bombadil.infradead.org ([198.137.202.9]:42023 "EHLO
	bombadil.infradead.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1754385AbbC0Q5w (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Fri, 27 Mar 2015 12:57:52 -0400
Date: Fri, 27 Mar 2015 17:57:39 +0100
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: Stephane Eranian <eranian@google.com>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>,
        Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@redhat.com>,
        Jiri Olsa <jolsa@redhat.com>,
        Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        John Stultz <john.stultz@linaro.org>, "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>,
        David Ahern <dsahern@gmail.com>,
        Andrew Morton <akpm@linux-foundation.org>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [tip:perf/timer] perf: Add per event clockid support
Message-ID: <20150327165739.GJ23123@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
References: <tip-34f439278cef7b1177f8ce24f9fc81dfc6221d3b@git.kernel.org>
 <CABPqkBTKYRU1uwhfWXhWKeqYmWCukXLrinvwtfC9xN4Fy=+2yg@mail.gmail.com>
 <20150327163547.GI23123@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
 <CABPqkBT-H8T40FcDZAWahMAajP4NBbMOVs9Awghh598xaoiz9Q@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CABPqkBT-H8T40FcDZAWahMAajP4NBbMOVs9Awghh598xaoiz9Q@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2012-12-30)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Fri, Mar 27, 2015 at 09:52:25AM -0700, Stephane Eranian wrote:
> Ok, I see. But on architectures which do not have NMI, they would all
> be safe. And that would work if they set the PERF_PMU_CAP_NO_NMI flag
> on their pmu->capabilities.

Indeed so. I have not audited them all as the current 'default' is safe.

> Next, I am trying to understand how perf is going to expose this. I am
> thinking about this in the context of my jitted code patches.

I send you some preliminary patches for this.

> With this approach, the jit runtime and the perf tool need to agree on
> the clock they are using. That mean they need to advertise or document
> the clock they use

This is indeed still missing, I put an XXX question in one of the
emails to this effect. I suppose we should store the used clockid in the
data file. I just haven't figured out how all that code works.

> and there needs to be an option in perf record to pass that same
> clockid.

I did indeed post a patch to do that.