From: Alexey Budankov <alexey.budankov@linux.intel.com>
To: Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com>
Cc: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org, peterz@infradead.org,
tglx@linutronix.de, acme@kernel.org, mingo@redhat.com,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, jolsa@redhat.com,
namhyung@kernel.org, Kan Liang <kan.liang@linux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] perf/x86/intel/lbr: Optimize context switches for LBR
Date: Fri, 14 Sep 2018 12:22:36 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <529b2498-0515-e33c-ebcc-af2a5ca7d974@linux.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20180914085409.GA27886@tassilo.jf.intel.com>
Hi Andi,
On 14.09.2018 11:54, Andi Kleen wrote:
>>> In principle the LBRs need to be flushed between threads. So does
>>> current code.
>>
>> IMHO, ideally, LBRs stack would be preserved and restored when
>> switching between execution stacks. That would allow implementing
>> per-thread statistical call graph view in Perf tools, fully based
>> on HW capabilities. It could be advantageous for some cases, in
>> comparison with traditional dwarf based call graph.
>
> This is already supported when you use LBR call stack mode
> (perf record --call-graph lbr)
Which kernel versions does it make sense to try?
Thanks,
Alexey
>
> This change is only optimizing the case when call stack mode is not used.
>
> Of course in call stack mode the context switch overhead is even higher,
> because it not only writes, but also reads.
>
> -Andi
>
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2018-09-14 9:23 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2018-09-13 20:08 [PATCH] perf/x86/intel/lbr: Optimize context switches for LBR kan.liang
2018-09-14 6:47 ` Alexey Budankov
2018-09-14 8:54 ` Andi Kleen
2018-09-14 9:22 ` Alexey Budankov [this message]
2018-09-14 12:39 ` Liang, Kan
2018-09-14 14:27 ` Andi Kleen
2018-09-14 14:57 ` Liang, Kan
2018-09-17 7:57 ` Alexey Budankov
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=529b2498-0515-e33c-ebcc-af2a5ca7d974@linux.intel.com \
--to=alexey.budankov@linux.intel.com \
--cc=acme@kernel.org \
--cc=ak@linux.intel.com \
--cc=jolsa@redhat.com \
--cc=kan.liang@linux.intel.com \
--cc=linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=namhyung@kernel.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=tglx@linutronix.de \
/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).