linux-mips
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [PATCH 3/5] MIPS/Perf-events: Check event state in validate_event()

To: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/5] MIPS/Perf-events: Check event state in validate_event()
From: Will Deacon <will.deacon@arm.com>
Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2010 12:03:27 +0000
Cc: Deng-Cheng Zhu <dengcheng.zhu@gmail.com>, ralf@linux-mips.org, fweisbec@gmail.com, linux-mips@linux-mips.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, wuzhangjin@gmail.com, paulus@samba.org, mingo@elte.hu, acme@redhat.com
In-reply-to: <1290166051.2109.1539.camel@laptop>
Original-recipient: rfc822;linux-mips@linux-mips.org
References: <1290063401-25440-1-git-send-email-dengcheng.zhu@gmail.com> <1290063401-25440-4-git-send-email-dengcheng.zhu@gmail.com> <1290159806.9342.7.camel@e102144-lin.cambridge.arm.com> <1290166051.2109.1539.camel@laptop>
Sender: linux-mips-bounce@linux-mips.org
On Fri, 2010-11-19 at 11:27 +0000, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > So this is the opposite of what we're doing on ARM. Our
> > approach is to ignore events that are OFF (or in the ERROR
> > state) or that belong to a different PMU. We do this by
> > allowing them to *pass* validation (i.e. by returning 1 above).
> > This means that we won't unconditionally fail a mixed event group.
> >
> > x86 does something similar in the collect_events function.
> 
> Right, note that the generic code only allows mixing with software
> events, so simply accepting them is ok as software events give the
> guarantee they're always schedulable.
> 
> 

Ok. Initially it was software events that I had in mind, but does
this constraint prevent you from grouping CPU events with events
for other PMUs within the system? For external L2 cache controllers
with their own PMUs, it would be desirable to group some L2 events
with L1 events on a different PMU.

If each PMU can validate its own events and ignore others then it
sounds like it should be straightforward...

Will



<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>