* [PATCH] xen/x86: Add Xenoprofile support for AMD Family 17h
@ 2017-05-23 21:28 Gary R Hook
2017-05-23 21:46 ` Boris Ostrovsky
0 siblings, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread
From: Gary R Hook @ 2017-05-23 21:28 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: xen-devel
Cc: andrew.cooper3, boris.ostrovsky, jbeulich, suravee.suthikulpanit
Signed-off-by: Gary R Hook <gary.hook@amd.com>
---
xen/arch/x86/oprofile/nmi_int.c | 4 ++++
1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
diff --git a/xen/arch/x86/oprofile/nmi_int.c b/xen/arch/x86/oprofile/nmi_int.c
index 13534d491405..5ad48c12e515 100644
--- a/xen/arch/x86/oprofile/nmi_int.c
+++ b/xen/arch/x86/oprofile/nmi_int.c
@@ -419,6 +419,10 @@ static int __init nmi_init(void)
model = &op_athlon_spec;
cpu_type = "x86-64/family16h";
break;
+ case 0x17:
+ model = &op_amd_fam15h_spec;
+ cpu_type = "x86-64/family17h";
+ break;
}
break;
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] xen/x86: Add Xenoprofile support for AMD Family 17h
2017-05-23 21:28 [PATCH] xen/x86: Add Xenoprofile support for AMD Family 17h Gary R Hook
@ 2017-05-23 21:46 ` Boris Ostrovsky
2017-05-23 21:51 ` Gary R Hook
0 siblings, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread
From: Boris Ostrovsky @ 2017-05-23 21:46 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Gary R Hook, xen-devel; +Cc: andrew.cooper3, jbeulich, suravee.suthikulpanit
On 05/23/2017 05:28 PM, Gary R Hook wrote:
> Signed-off-by: Gary R Hook <gary.hook@amd.com>
> ---
> xen/arch/x86/oprofile/nmi_int.c | 4 ++++
> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/xen/arch/x86/oprofile/nmi_int.c b/xen/arch/x86/oprofile/nmi_int.c
> index 13534d491405..5ad48c12e515 100644
> --- a/xen/arch/x86/oprofile/nmi_int.c
> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/oprofile/nmi_int.c
> @@ -419,6 +419,10 @@ static int __init nmi_init(void)
> model = &op_athlon_spec;
> cpu_type = "x86-64/family16h";
> break;
> + case 0x17:
> + model = &op_amd_fam15h_spec;
> + cpu_type = "x86-64/family17h";
> + break;
> }
> break;
Have you actually tried this? I don't know whether oprofile still works
since corresponding kernel patches that I am aware of are at least 5
years old.
-boris
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] xen/x86: Add Xenoprofile support for AMD Family 17h
2017-05-23 21:46 ` Boris Ostrovsky
@ 2017-05-23 21:51 ` Gary R Hook
2017-05-23 22:02 ` Boris Ostrovsky
2017-05-24 6:43 ` Jan Beulich
0 siblings, 2 replies; 7+ messages in thread
From: Gary R Hook @ 2017-05-23 21:51 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Boris Ostrovsky, xen-devel
Cc: andrew.cooper3, jbeulich, suravee.suthikulpanit
On 5/23/2017 4:46 PM, Boris Ostrovsky wrote:
> On 05/23/2017 05:28 PM, Gary R Hook wrote:
>> Signed-off-by: Gary R Hook <gary.hook@amd.com>
>> ---
>> xen/arch/x86/oprofile/nmi_int.c | 4 ++++
>> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
>>
>> diff --git a/xen/arch/x86/oprofile/nmi_int.c b/xen/arch/x86/oprofile/nmi_int.c
>> index 13534d491405..5ad48c12e515 100644
>> --- a/xen/arch/x86/oprofile/nmi_int.c
>> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/oprofile/nmi_int.c
>> @@ -419,6 +419,10 @@ static int __init nmi_init(void)
>> model = &op_athlon_spec;
>> cpu_type = "x86-64/family16h";
>> break;
>> + case 0x17:
>> + model = &op_amd_fam15h_spec;
>> + cpu_type = "x86-64/family17h";
>> + break;
>> }
>> break;
>
>
> Have you actually tried this? I don't know whether oprofile still works
> since corresponding kernel patches that I am aware of are at least 5
> years old.
Yes, I was getting a complaint during boot. That's why I did it. Works a
treat on my family 17 system :-)
I don't know whether the code is relevant (and if not, it should be
removed, right?) but I don't like complaints, no matter how spurious.
Thus, I minor patch.
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] xen/x86: Add Xenoprofile support for AMD Family 17h
2017-05-23 21:51 ` Gary R Hook
@ 2017-05-23 22:02 ` Boris Ostrovsky
2017-05-24 6:43 ` Jan Beulich
1 sibling, 0 replies; 7+ messages in thread
From: Boris Ostrovsky @ 2017-05-23 22:02 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Gary R Hook, xen-devel; +Cc: andrew.cooper3, jbeulich, suravee.suthikulpanit
On 05/23/2017 05:51 PM, Gary R Hook wrote:
> On 5/23/2017 4:46 PM, Boris Ostrovsky wrote:
>> On 05/23/2017 05:28 PM, Gary R Hook wrote:
>>> Signed-off-by: Gary R Hook <gary.hook@amd.com>
>>> ---
>>> xen/arch/x86/oprofile/nmi_int.c | 4 ++++
>>> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/xen/arch/x86/oprofile/nmi_int.c
>>> b/xen/arch/x86/oprofile/nmi_int.c
>>> index 13534d491405..5ad48c12e515 100644
>>> --- a/xen/arch/x86/oprofile/nmi_int.c
>>> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/oprofile/nmi_int.c
>>> @@ -419,6 +419,10 @@ static int __init nmi_init(void)
>>> model = &op_athlon_spec;
>>> cpu_type = "x86-64/family16h";
>>> break;
>>> + case 0x17:
>>> + model = &op_amd_fam15h_spec;
>>> + cpu_type = "x86-64/family17h";
>>> + break;
>>> }
>>> break;
>>
>>
>> Have you actually tried this? I don't know whether oprofile still works
>> since corresponding kernel patches that I am aware of are at least 5
>> years old.
>
> Yes, I was getting a complaint during boot. That's why I did it. Works
> a treat on my family 17 system :-)
>
> I don't know whether the code is relevant (and if not, it should be
> removed, right?) but I don't like complaints, no matter how spurious.
> Thus, I minor patch.
FWIW, it looks like last meaningful patch to Linux oprofile code
(baremetal) was around 2015.
-boris
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] xen/x86: Add Xenoprofile support for AMD Family 17h
2017-05-23 21:51 ` Gary R Hook
2017-05-23 22:02 ` Boris Ostrovsky
@ 2017-05-24 6:43 ` Jan Beulich
2017-05-24 15:00 ` Gary R Hook
1 sibling, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread
From: Jan Beulich @ 2017-05-24 6:43 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Gary R Hook, Boris Ostrovsky
Cc: andrew.cooper3, suravee.suthikulpanit, xen-devel
>>> On 23.05.17 at 23:51, <gary.hook@amd.com> wrote:
> On 5/23/2017 4:46 PM, Boris Ostrovsky wrote:
>> On 05/23/2017 05:28 PM, Gary R Hook wrote:
>>> Signed-off-by: Gary R Hook <gary.hook@amd.com>
>>> ---
>>> xen/arch/x86/oprofile/nmi_int.c | 4 ++++
>>> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/xen/arch/x86/oprofile/nmi_int.c
> b/xen/arch/x86/oprofile/nmi_int.c
>>> index 13534d491405..5ad48c12e515 100644
>>> --- a/xen/arch/x86/oprofile/nmi_int.c
>>> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/oprofile/nmi_int.c
>>> @@ -419,6 +419,10 @@ static int __init nmi_init(void)
>>> model = &op_athlon_spec;
>>> cpu_type = "x86-64/family16h";
>>> break;
>>> + case 0x17:
>>> + model = &op_amd_fam15h_spec;
>>> + cpu_type = "x86-64/family17h";
>>> + break;
>>> }
>>> break;
>>
>>
>> Have you actually tried this? I don't know whether oprofile still works
>> since corresponding kernel patches that I am aware of are at least 5
>> years old.
>
> Yes, I was getting a complaint during boot. That's why I did it. Works a
> treat on my family 17 system :-)
I think Boris meant more than just boot a system, i.e. whether you've
actually used oprofile successfully with the change. Dealing with the
"Initialization failed" message would not necessarily require properly
installing handlers - we could also declare newer families unsupported
and simply suppress the message in such cases. Note how on most
Intel family 6 models code behaves in this very way.
Btw, please also note the indentation issue your patch has (spaces
vs tabs).
Jan
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] xen/x86: Add Xenoprofile support for AMD Family 17h
2017-05-24 6:43 ` Jan Beulich
@ 2017-05-24 15:00 ` Gary R Hook
2017-05-24 15:55 ` Jan Beulich
0 siblings, 1 reply; 7+ messages in thread
From: Gary R Hook @ 2017-05-24 15:00 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Jan Beulich, Boris Ostrovsky
Cc: andrew.cooper3, suravee.suthikulpanit, xen-devel
On 5/24/2017 1:43 AM, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>> On 23.05.17 at 23:51, <gary.hook@amd.com> wrote:
>> On 5/23/2017 4:46 PM, Boris Ostrovsky wrote:
>>> On 05/23/2017 05:28 PM, Gary R Hook wrote:
>>>> Signed-off-by: Gary R Hook <gary.hook@amd.com>
>>>> ---
>>>> xen/arch/x86/oprofile/nmi_int.c | 4 ++++
>>>> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/xen/arch/x86/oprofile/nmi_int.c
>> b/xen/arch/x86/oprofile/nmi_int.c
>>>> index 13534d491405..5ad48c12e515 100644
>>>> --- a/xen/arch/x86/oprofile/nmi_int.c
>>>> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/oprofile/nmi_int.c
>>>> @@ -419,6 +419,10 @@ static int __init nmi_init(void)
>>>> model = &op_athlon_spec;
>>>> cpu_type = "x86-64/family16h";
>>>> break;
>>>> + case 0x17:
>>>> + model = &op_amd_fam15h_spec;
>>>> + cpu_type = "x86-64/family17h";
>>>> + break;
>>>> }
>>>> break;
>>>
>>>
>>> Have you actually tried this? I don't know whether oprofile still works
>>> since corresponding kernel patches that I am aware of are at least 5
>>> years old.
>>
>> Yes, I was getting a complaint during boot. That's why I did it. Works a
>> treat on my family 17 system :-)
>
> I think Boris meant more than just boot a system, i.e. whether you've
> actually used oprofile successfully with the change.
My interpretation of the state of oprofile is that it's stagnant. Fron
what I can tell, the future is 'perf'. I looked around, but could find
nothing current for a project. Where does that leave us?
> Dealing with the
> "Initialization failed" message would not necessarily require properly
> installing handlers - we could also declare newer families unsupported
> and simply suppress the message in such cases. Note how on most
> Intel family 6 models code behaves in this very way.
That would be even better, IMHO. What would we like to do?
> Btw, please also note the indentation issue your patch has (spaces
> vs tabs).
I copied a line from above, which uses spaces. My bad, but the badly
formatted code has been there for a while.
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
* Re: [PATCH] xen/x86: Add Xenoprofile support for AMD Family 17h
2017-05-24 15:00 ` Gary R Hook
@ 2017-05-24 15:55 ` Jan Beulich
0 siblings, 0 replies; 7+ messages in thread
From: Jan Beulich @ 2017-05-24 15:55 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Gary R Hook
Cc: andrew.cooper3, Boris Ostrovsky, suravee.suthikulpanit, xen-devel
>>> On 24.05.17 at 17:00, <gary.hook@amd.com> wrote:
> On 5/24/2017 1:43 AM, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>>>> On 23.05.17 at 23:51, <gary.hook@amd.com> wrote:
>>> On 5/23/2017 4:46 PM, Boris Ostrovsky wrote:
>>>> On 05/23/2017 05:28 PM, Gary R Hook wrote:
>>>>> Signed-off-by: Gary R Hook <gary.hook@amd.com>
>>>>> ---
>>>>> xen/arch/x86/oprofile/nmi_int.c | 4 ++++
>>>>> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+)
>>>>>
>>>>> diff --git a/xen/arch/x86/oprofile/nmi_int.c
>>> b/xen/arch/x86/oprofile/nmi_int.c
>>>>> index 13534d491405..5ad48c12e515 100644
>>>>> --- a/xen/arch/x86/oprofile/nmi_int.c
>>>>> +++ b/xen/arch/x86/oprofile/nmi_int.c
>>>>> @@ -419,6 +419,10 @@ static int __init nmi_init(void)
>>>>> model = &op_athlon_spec;
>>>>> cpu_type = "x86-64/family16h";
>>>>> break;
>>>>> + case 0x17:
>>>>> + model = &op_amd_fam15h_spec;
>>>>> + cpu_type = "x86-64/family17h";
>>>>> + break;
>>>>> }
>>>>> break;
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Have you actually tried this? I don't know whether oprofile still works
>>>> since corresponding kernel patches that I am aware of are at least 5
>>>> years old.
>>>
>>> Yes, I was getting a complaint during boot. That's why I did it. Works a
>>> treat on my family 17 system :-)
>>
>> I think Boris meant more than just boot a system, i.e. whether you've
>> actually used oprofile successfully with the change.
>
> My interpretation of the state of oprofile is that it's stagnant. Fron
> what I can tell, the future is 'perf'. I looked around, but could find
> nothing current for a project. Where does that leave us?
Well, in that case you should at the very least clearly state that
you did not actually test this.
>> Dealing with the
>> "Initialization failed" message would not necessarily require properly
>> installing handlers - we could also declare newer families unsupported
>> and simply suppress the message in such cases. Note how on most
>> Intel family 6 models code behaves in this very way.
>
> That would be even better, IMHO. What would we like to do?
Short of verifying whether things actually work with the change,
my preference would be to leave the code alone. What's wrong
with it saying it doesn't support the family in question? Second
best option is to silence it as suggested.
Jan
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xen.org
https://lists.xen.org/xen-devel
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 7+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2017-05-24 15:55 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2017-05-23 21:28 [PATCH] xen/x86: Add Xenoprofile support for AMD Family 17h Gary R Hook
2017-05-23 21:46 ` Boris Ostrovsky
2017-05-23 21:51 ` Gary R Hook
2017-05-23 22:02 ` Boris Ostrovsky
2017-05-24 6:43 ` Jan Beulich
2017-05-24 15:00 ` Gary R Hook
2017-05-24 15:55 ` Jan Beulich
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.