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 S1753126AbcCTRKI (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Sun, 20 Mar 2016 13:10:08 -0400
Received: from [198.137.202.9] ([198.137.202.9]:50749 "EHLO
	bombadil.infradead.org" rhost-flags-FAIL-FAIL-OK-OK)
	by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751249AbcCTRKD (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Sun, 20 Mar 2016 13:10:03 -0400
Date: Sun, 20 Mar 2016 18:08:47 +0100
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: Borislav Petkov <bp@alien8.de>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>, LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>, aherrmann@suse.com,
        jencce.kernel@gmail.com, Rui Huang <ray.huang@amd.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] x86/topology: Fix AMD core count
Message-ID: <20160320170847.GO6344@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
References: <20160318150345.146716865@infradead.org>
 <20160318150538.551407299@infradead.org>
 <alpine.DEB.2.11.1603191011320.3978@nanos>
 <20160320103946.GL6344@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
 <20160320110454.GB4230@pd.tnic>
 <20160320123225.GN6344@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
 <20160320124629.GY6375@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
 <20160320130925.GC4230@pd.tnic>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20160320130925.GC4230@pd.tnic>
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 Sun, Mar 20, 2016 at 02:09:26PM +0100, Borislav Petkov wrote:
> First a question about the big picture: why is amd/core.c even
> dealing with NB counters?

It it not, it is dealing with Fam10 NB events.

Fam10h doesn't have NB counters. Its NB events are on the same counters
as all the other events. Its just that they have constraints.