From: Reinette Chatre <reinette.chatre@intel.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Cc: fenghua.yu@intel.com, tony.luck@intel.com, mingo@redhat.com,
acme@kernel.org, gavin.hindman@intel.com, jithu.joseph@intel.com,
dave.hansen@intel.com, hpa@zytor.com, x86@kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH V5 0/6] perf and x86/intel_rdt: Fix lack of coordination with perf
Date: Sat, 29 Sep 2018 07:23:55 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <42c2b375-dbb9-11a3-8e2f-bec744e73b10@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180928065830.GE3439@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
On 9/27/2018 11:58 PM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 27, 2018 at 10:39:01PM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
>> On Fri, 21 Sep 2018, Reinette Chatre wrote:
>>
>>> Dear Maintainers,
>>
>> Sorry for replying late.
>>
>>> On 9/20/2018 7:11 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>>>> On Wed, Sep 19, 2018 at 10:29:05AM -0700, Reinette Chatre wrote:
>>>>> Reinette Chatre (6):
>>>>> perf/core: Add sanity check to deal with pinned event failure
>>>>> perf/x86: Add helper to obtain performance counter index
>>>>> x86/intel_rdt: Remove local register variables
>>>>> x86/intel_rdt: Create required perf event attributes
>>>>> x86/intel_rdt: Use perf infrastructure for measurements
>>>>> x86/intel_rdt: Re-enable pseudo-lock measurements
>>>>>
>>>>> Documentation/x86/intel_rdt_ui.txt | 22 +-
>>>>> arch/x86/events/core.c | 21 ++
>>>>> arch/x86/include/asm/perf_event.h | 1 +
>>>>> arch/x86/kernel/cpu/intel_rdt_pseudo_lock.c | 372 ++++++++++++--------
>>>>> kernel/events/core.c | 6 +
>>>>> 5 files changed, 261 insertions(+), 161 deletions(-)
>>>>
>>>> Yeah, these look good, thanks!
>>>>
>>>> Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
>>>>
>>>
>>> Could you please consider this series for inclusion into v4.19?
>>
>> So in principle I'm having no objections as this really is mostly a RDT
>> only issue.
>>
>> Peter, any objections against the Perf part of it, aside the core patch
>> which is an obvious fix?
>
> Nope, look up a few lines to observe my Ack ;-)
>
I interpreted Thomas and Peter's responses to mean that there are no
objections for this to be included in v4.19 as a fix.
If I understand the tip branches correctly the core patch seems to be
headed to v4.19 while the rest (excluding the final patch
"x86/intel_rdt: Re-enable pseudo-lock measurements") are headed to v4.20.
Have you decided against including this into v4.19 or did I
misunderstand the responses and/or branches?
Thank you for helping me to sort this out
Reinette
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-09-29 14:26 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-09-19 17:29 [PATCH V5 0/6] perf and x86/intel_rdt: Fix lack of coordination with perf Reinette Chatre
2018-09-19 17:29 ` [PATCH V5 1/6] perf/core: Add sanity check to deal with pinned event failure Reinette Chatre
2018-09-28 20:48 ` [tip:perf/urgent] " tip-bot for Reinette Chatre
2018-09-19 17:29 ` [PATCH V5 2/6] perf/x86: Add helper to obtain performance counter index Reinette Chatre
2018-09-29 7:00 ` [tip:x86/cache] " tip-bot for Reinette Chatre
2018-09-19 17:29 ` [PATCH V5 3/6] x86/intel_rdt: Remove local register variables Reinette Chatre
2018-09-29 7:01 ` [tip:x86/cache] " tip-bot for Reinette Chatre
2018-09-19 17:29 ` [PATCH V5 4/6] x86/intel_rdt: Create required perf event attributes Reinette Chatre
2018-09-29 7:01 ` [tip:x86/cache] " tip-bot for Reinette Chatre
2018-09-19 17:29 ` [PATCH V5 5/6] x86/intel_rdt: Use perf infrastructure for measurements Reinette Chatre
2018-09-20 14:11 ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-09-20 19:02 ` [PATCH V6 " Reinette Chatre
2018-09-29 7:02 ` [tip:x86/cache] " tip-bot for Reinette Chatre
2018-09-19 17:29 ` [PATCH V5 6/6] x86/intel_rdt: Re-enable pseudo-lock measurements Reinette Chatre
2018-10-03 19:57 ` [tip:x86/cache] " tip-bot for Reinette Chatre
2018-09-20 14:11 ` [PATCH V5 0/6] perf and x86/intel_rdt: Fix lack of coordination with perf Peter Zijlstra
2018-09-21 16:49 ` Reinette Chatre
2018-09-27 20:39 ` Thomas Gleixner
2018-09-28 6:58 ` Peter Zijlstra
2018-09-29 14:23 ` Reinette Chatre [this message]
2018-09-29 17:56 ` Thomas Gleixner
2018-10-03 19:41 ` Reinette Chatre
2018-10-03 19:45 ` Thomas Gleixner
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=42c2b375-dbb9-11a3-8e2f-bec744e73b10@intel.com \
--to=reinette.chatre@intel.com \
--cc=acme@kernel.org \
--cc=dave.hansen@intel.com \
--cc=fenghua.yu@intel.com \
--cc=gavin.hindman@intel.com \
--cc=hpa@zytor.com \
--cc=jithu.joseph@intel.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
--cc=tony.luck@intel.com \
--cc=x86@kernel.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).