Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > linux.kernel > #1531547 > unrolled thread

[PATCH] perf/x86: fix event counter update issue

Started bykan.liang@intel.com
First post2016-11-28 20:30 +0100
Last post2016-11-29 20:10 +0100
Articles 2 on this page of 22 — 6 participants

Back to article view | Back to linux.kernel

Contents

  [PATCH] perf/x86: fix event counter update issue kan.liang@intel.com - 2016-11-28 20:30 +0100
    Re: [PATCH] perf/x86: fix event counter update issue Stephane Eranian <eranian@google.com> - 2016-11-28 20:50 +0100
      RE: [PATCH] perf/x86: fix event counter update issue "Liang, Kan" <kan.liang@intel.com> - 2016-11-28 21:10 +0100
        Re: [PATCH] perf/x86: fix event counter update issue Stephane Eranian <eranian@google.com> - 2016-11-28 21:20 +0100
          RE: [PATCH] perf/x86: fix event counter update issue "Liang, Kan" <kan.liang@intel.com> - 2016-11-28 21:30 +0100
    Re: [PATCH] perf/x86: fix event counter update issue Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> - 2016-11-29 10:30 +0100
      RE: [PATCH] perf/x86: fix event counter update issue "Liang, Kan" <kan.liang@intel.com> - 2016-11-29 15:50 +0100
        Re: [PATCH] perf/x86: fix event counter update issue Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> - 2016-11-29 18:00 +0100
          RE: [PATCH] perf/x86: fix event counter update issue "Liang, Kan" <kan.liang@intel.com> - 2016-11-29 18:10 +0100
            Re: [PATCH] perf/x86: fix event counter update issue Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> - 2016-11-29 18:20 +0100
      Re: [PATCH] perf/x86: fix event counter update issue Stephane Eranian <eranian@google.com> - 2016-11-29 18:30 +0100
        Re: [PATCH] perf/x86: fix event counter update issue Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> - 2016-11-29 18:40 +0100
          Re: [PATCH] perf/x86: fix event counter update issue Stephane Eranian <eranian@google.com> - 2016-11-29 19:20 +0100
          Re: [PATCH] perf/x86: fix event counter update issue Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com> - 2016-11-29 19:40 +0100
          RE: [PATCH] perf/x86: fix event counter update issue "Liang, Kan" <kan.liang@intel.com> - 2016-11-29 20:10 +0100
            Re: [PATCH] perf/x86: fix event counter update issue Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> - 2016-11-29 20:40 +0100
              Re: [PATCH] perf/x86: fix event counter update issue Stephane Eranian <eranian@google.com> - 2016-11-29 21:40 +0100
              RE: [PATCH] perf/x86: fix event counter update issue "Liang, Kan" <kan.liang@intel.com> - 2016-11-29 21:40 +0100
                RE: [PATCH] perf/x86: fix event counter update issue "Odzioba, Lukasz" <lukasz.odzioba@intel.com> - 2016-12-02 14:00 +0100
                  Re: [PATCH] perf/x86: fix event counter update issue Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> - 2016-12-05 11:30 +0100
                    RE: [PATCH] perf/x86: fix event counter update issue "Odzioba, Lukasz" <lukasz.odzioba@intel.com> - 2016-12-05 12:30 +0100
        RE: [PATCH] perf/x86: fix event counter update issue "Odzioba, Lukasz" <lukasz.odzioba@intel.com> - 2016-11-29 20:10 +0100

Page 2 of 2 — ← Prev page 1 [2]

#1536008

From"Odzioba, Lukasz" <lukasz.odzioba@intel.com>
Date2016-12-05 12:30 +0100
Message-ID<sKZD3-3S7-1@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to#1535982
On Monday, December 5, 2016 11:25 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> I'll certainly, try. I've queued it as per the below.

Great, thank you!

Lukas

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#1532687

From"Odzioba, Lukasz" <lukasz.odzioba@intel.com>
Date2016-11-29 20:10 +0100
Message-ID<sIVWW-451-35@gated-at.bofh.it>
In reply to#1532595
On Tuesday, November 29, 2016 6:20 PM Stephane Eranian wrote:
>> On Tue, Nov 29, 2016 at 1:25 AM, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> wrote:
>>  How can this happen? IIRC the thing increments, we program a negative
>>  value, and when it passes 0 we generate a PMI.
>>	
> Yeah, that's the part I don't quite understand thus my initial
> question. What you describe
> is what is supposed to happen regardless of the counter width.

I don't see any interrupts flying around:
# cat /proc/interrupts | grep PMI
PMI:         10         14         12         18   Performance monitoring interrupts
(test case here)
# cat /proc/interrupts | grep PMI
PMI:         10         14         12         18   Performance monitoring interrupts

What I also don't understand is why this is only seen on per cpu, or system wide mode.
PMIs seems to be programmed because if we wait long enough it will eventually overflow,
what we saw in one of tests cases from commit msg.
In the failing case (system wide) x86_perf_event_update is called only once at the end of workload:

259.154530: x86_perf_event_set_period: x86_perf_event_set_period left = ffffffffff, ret = 0
550.079623: x86_pmu_stop: x86_pmu_stop -> need update
550.079625: x86_perf_event_update: x86_perf_event_update config = 11003c, period = ffff880276212000
550.079627: x86_perf_event_update: x86_perf_event_update sample_period = ffffffffff,  last_period = ffffffffff, period_left = ffffffffff
550.079629: x86_perf_event_update: x86_perf_event_update(1) prev = ffffff0000000001, new = 8bba934b9e, delta = ffffff8bba934b9d, shift=24

In the good case -per pid case, x86_perf_event_update is called every ~3 seconds.
568.448083: x86_perf_event_set_period: x86_perf_event_set_period left = ffffffffff, ret = 0
568.949105: x86_pmu_stop: x86_pmu_stop -> need update
568.949106: x86_perf_event_update: x86_perf_event_update config = 11003c, period = ffff880276212000
568.949108: x86_perf_event_update: x86_perf_event_update sample_period = ffffffffff,  last_period = ffffffffff, period_left = ffffffffff
568.949110: x86_perf_event_update: x86_perf_event_update(1) prev = ffffff0000000001, new = 3d9525cc, delta = 3d9525cb, shift=24
568.949135: x86_perf_event_set_period: x86_perf_event_set_period left = ffc26ada34, ret = 0
570.679697: x86_pmu_stop: x86_pmu_stop -> need update
570.679699: x86_perf_event_update: x86_perf_event_update config = 11003c, period = ffff880276212000
570.679700: x86_perf_event_update: x86_perf_event_update sample_period = ffffffffff,  last_period = ffffffffff, period_left = ffc26ada34
570.679701: x86_perf_event_update: x86_perf_event_update(1) prev = ffffff003d9525cc, new = 112601ddf, delta = d4caf813, shift=24
570.679723: x86_perf_event_set_period: x86_perf_event_set_period left = feed9fe221, ret = 0
(... ~115 similar calls here)
859.431686: x86_pmu_stop: x86_pmu_stop -> need update
859.431687: x86_perf_event_update: x86_perf_event_update config = 11003c, period = ffff880276209000
859.431688: x86_perf_event_update: x86_perf_event_update sample_period = ffffffffff,  last_period = ffffffffff, period_left = 7453fc7d0d
859.431689: x86_perf_event_update: x86_perf_event_update(1) prev = ffffff8bac0382f3, new = 8bbaa4a147, delta = ea11e54, shift=24

Thanks,
Lukas

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Page 2 of 2 — ← Prev page 1 [2]

Back to top | Article view | linux.kernel

csiph-web