From: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@redhat.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
Cc: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@kernel.org>, lkml <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>, Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org>,
Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com>,
Kan Liang <kan.liang@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] perf/x86/intel: Add proper condition to run sched_task callbacks
Date: Wed, 19 Jul 2017 00:11:38 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20170718221138.GC13553@krava> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20170718123734.a7hgi3wwduuejz7f@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
On Tue, Jul 18, 2017 at 02:37:34PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 18, 2017 at 11:29:32AM +0200, Jiri Olsa wrote:
>
> > because we have 2 places using the same callback
> > - PEBS drain for free running counters
> > - LBR save/store
> >
> > both of them called from intel_pmu_sched_task
> >
> > so let's say PEBS drain setup the callback for the event,
> > but in the callback itself (intel_pmu_sched_task) we will
> > also run the code for LBR save/restore, which we did not
> > ask for, but the code in intel_pmu_sched_task does not
> > check for that
>
> Ah fair enough; Changelog confused me.
>
> > I'm adding conditions to recognize the work that needs
> > to be done in the callback
> >
> > another option might be to add support for more x86_pmu::sched_task
> > callbacks, which might be cleaner
>
> Right; either that or pull the condition into the functions themselves
> to create less churn. Something like so I suppose...
ok, will send new version
jirka
>
>
> diff --git a/arch/x86/events/intel/core.c b/arch/x86/events/intel/core.c
> index aa62437d1aa1..2d533d4c0e2c 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/events/intel/core.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/events/intel/core.c
> @@ -3265,10 +3265,8 @@ static void intel_pmu_cpu_dying(int cpu)
> static void intel_pmu_sched_task(struct perf_event_context *ctx,
> bool sched_in)
> {
> - if (x86_pmu.pebs_active)
> - intel_pmu_pebs_sched_task(ctx, sched_in);
> - if (x86_pmu.lbr_nr)
> - intel_pmu_lbr_sched_task(ctx, sched_in);
> + intel_pmu_pebs_sched_task(ctx, sched_in);
> + intel_pmu_lbr_sched_task(ctx, sched_in);
> }
>
> PMU_FORMAT_ATTR(offcore_rsp, "config1:0-63");
> diff --git a/arch/x86/events/intel/ds.c b/arch/x86/events/intel/ds.c
> index c6d23ffe422d..6ee7ebdc8555 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/events/intel/ds.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/events/intel/ds.c
> @@ -606,12 +606,6 @@ static inline void intel_pmu_drain_pebs_buffer(void)
> x86_pmu.drain_pebs(®s);
> }
>
> -void intel_pmu_pebs_sched_task(struct perf_event_context *ctx, bool sched_in)
> -{
> - if (!sched_in)
> - intel_pmu_drain_pebs_buffer();
> -}
> -
> /*
> * PEBS
> */
> @@ -816,6 +810,14 @@ static inline bool pebs_needs_sched_cb(struct cpu_hw_events *cpuc)
> return cpuc->n_pebs && (cpuc->n_pebs == cpuc->n_large_pebs);
> }
>
> +void intel_pmu_pebs_sched_task(struct perf_event_context *ctx, bool sched_in)
> +{
> + struct cpu_hw_events *cpuc = this_cpu_ptr(&cpu_hw_events);
> +
> + if (!sched_in && pebs_needs_sched_cb(cpuc))
> + intel_pmu_drain_pebs_buffer();
> +}
> +
> static inline void pebs_update_threshold(struct cpu_hw_events *cpuc)
> {
> struct debug_store *ds = cpuc->ds;
> diff --git a/arch/x86/events/intel/lbr.c b/arch/x86/events/intel/lbr.c
> index eb261656a320..955457a30197 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/events/intel/lbr.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/events/intel/lbr.c
> @@ -380,8 +380,12 @@ static void __intel_pmu_lbr_save(struct x86_perf_task_context *task_ctx)
>
> void intel_pmu_lbr_sched_task(struct perf_event_context *ctx, bool sched_in)
> {
> + struct cpu_hw_events *cpuc = this_cpu_ptr(&cpu_hw_events);
> struct x86_perf_task_context *task_ctx;
>
> + if (!cpuc->lbr_users)
> + return;
> +
> /*
> * If LBR callstack feature is enabled and the stack was saved when
> * the task was scheduled out, restore the stack. Otherwise flush
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2017-07-18 22:11 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2017-07-17 15:01 [PATCH] perf/x86/intel: Add proper condition to run sched_task callbacks Jiri Olsa
2017-07-18 9:14 ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-07-18 9:29 ` Jiri Olsa
2017-07-18 12:37 ` Peter Zijlstra
2017-07-18 22:11 ` Jiri Olsa [this message]
2017-07-19 7:52 ` Jiri Olsa
2017-07-21 9:38 ` [tip:perf/urgent] " tip-bot for Jiri Olsa
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=20170718221138.GC13553@krava \
--to=jolsa@redhat.com \
--cc=alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com \
--cc=andi@firstfloor.org \
--cc=jolsa@kernel.org \
--cc=kan.liang@intel.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).