All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Yan, Zheng" <zheng.z.yan@intel.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, mingo@kernel.org,
	eranian@google.com, andi@firstfloor.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 4/7] perf, x86: Save/resotre LBR stack during context switch
Date: Fri, 05 Jul 2013 13:36:24 +0800	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <51D65B58.1050201@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20130704124536.GK23916@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>

On 07/04/2013 08:45 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 01, 2013 at 03:23:04PM +0800, Yan, Zheng wrote:
> 
>> @@ -2488,25 +2508,31 @@ static void perf_branch_stack_sched_in(struct task_struct *prev,
>>  
>>  	list_for_each_entry_rcu(pmu, &pmus, entry) {
>>  		cpuctx = this_cpu_ptr(pmu->pmu_cpu_context);
>> +		task_ctx = cpuctx->task_ctx;
>>  
>>  		/*
>> -		 * check if the context has at least one
>> -		 * event using PERF_SAMPLE_BRANCH_STACK
>> +		 * force flush the branch stack if there are cpu-wide events
>> +		 * using PERF_SAMPLE_BRANCH_STACK
>> +		 *
>> +		 * save/restore the branch stack if the task context has
>> +		 * at least one event using PERF_SAMPLE_BRANCH_STACK
>>  		 */
>> -		if (cpuctx->ctx.nr_branch_stack > 0
>> -		    && pmu->flush_branch_stack) {
>> -
>> +		bool force_flush = cpuctx->ctx.nr_branch_stack > 0;
>> +		if (pmu->branch_stack_sched &&
>> +		    (force_flush ||
>> +		     (task_ctx && task_ctx->nr_branch_stack > 0))) {
>>  			pmu = cpuctx->ctx.pmu;
>>  
>> -			perf_ctx_lock(cpuctx, cpuctx->task_ctx);
>> +			perf_ctx_lock(cpuctx, task_ctx);
>>  
>>  			perf_pmu_disable(pmu);
>>  
>> -			pmu->flush_branch_stack();
>> +			pmu->branch_stack_sched(task_ctx,
>> +						sched_in, force_flush);
>>  
>>  			perf_pmu_enable(pmu);
>>  
>> -			perf_ctx_unlock(cpuctx, cpuctx->task_ctx);
>> +			perf_ctx_unlock(cpuctx, task_ctx);
>>  		}
>>  	}
>>  
> 
> I never really like this; and yes I know I wrote part of that. Is there
> any way we can get rid of this and to it 'properly' through the events
> that get scheduled?
> 
> After all; the LBR usage is through the events, so scheduling the events
> should also manage the LBR state.
> 
> What is missing for that to work?
> 

the LBR is shared resource, can be used by multiple events at the same time.
Strictly speaking,LBR is associated with task, not event. One example is
there are 5 events using the LBR stack feature, but there are only 4 counters.
So these events need schedule. Saving/restoring LBR on the basis of event is
clearly wrong.

Regards
Yan, Zheng



  reply	other threads:[~2013-07-05  5:36 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 25+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2013-07-01  7:23 [PATCH v2 0/7] perf, x86: Haswell LBR call stack support Yan, Zheng
2013-07-01  7:23 ` [PATCH v2 1/7] perf, x86: Reduce lbr_sel_map size Yan, Zheng
2013-07-01  7:23 ` [PATCH v2 2/7] perf, x86: Basic Haswell LBR call stack support Yan, Zheng
2013-07-01  7:23 ` [PATCH v2 3/7] perf, x86: Introduce x86 special perf event context Yan, Zheng
2013-07-04 12:41   ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-07-05  3:19     ` Yan, Zheng
2013-07-05 12:45       ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-07-08  8:51         ` Yan, Zheng
2013-07-01  7:23 ` [PATCH v2 4/7] perf, x86: Save/resotre LBR stack during context switch Yan, Zheng
2013-07-04  9:57   ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-07-04 11:39     ` Yan, Zheng
2013-07-04 13:44     ` Andi Kleen
2013-07-04 14:00       ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-07-10 17:57         ` Andi Kleen
2013-07-04 12:44   ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-07-04 12:45   ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-07-05  5:36     ` Yan, Zheng [this message]
2013-07-05  8:15       ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-07-05  8:51         ` Yan, Zheng
2013-07-05 12:31           ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-08-08  6:18             ` Yan, Zheng
2013-07-01  7:23 ` [PATCH v2 5/7] perf, core: Pass perf_sample_data to perf_callchain() Yan, Zheng
2013-07-01  7:23 ` [PATCH v2 6/7] perf, x86: Use LBR call stack to get user callchain Yan, Zheng
2013-07-01  7:23 ` [PATCH v2 7/7] perf, x86: Discard zero length call entries in LBR call stack Yan, Zheng
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2012-10-24  5:59 [PATCH V2 0/7] perf, x86: Haswell LBR call stack support Yan, Zheng
2012-10-24  5:59 ` [PATCH V2 4/7] perf, x86: Save/resotre LBR stack during context switch Yan, Zheng

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=51D65B58.1050201@intel.com \
    --to=zheng.z.yan@intel.com \
    --cc=andi@firstfloor.org \
    --cc=eranian@google.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mingo@kernel.org \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.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 an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.