lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2014]   [Jan]   [8]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH v0 04/71] itrace: Infrastructure for instruction flow tracing units
restoring the list.. I really should drop all emails you send off list
into /dev/null.

On Wed, Jan 08, 2014 at 09:28:40AM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 07, 2014 at 10:23:22PM +0100, Andi Kleen wrote:
> > > Yes we very much rely on the FREEZE bits for LBR. PT and LBR being
> > > mutually exclusive wasn't documented (or I missed it) and completely
> > > blows.
> >
> > Can you describe why it is a problem? I had considered it only a minor
> > inconvenience, for many things you would use LBRs for PT is far better.
>
> Because is someone writes a GCC tool using perf-LBR support for some
> basic block analysis, and someone else writes another tool for PT, then
> the first tool magically stops working when the PT tool is started.
>
> We cannot refuse to create perf-LBR events, because at that time there
> might not be a PT user -- and even if there was one, it might go away.
>
> But as long as there's a PT user around, the LBR events will not be able
> to be scheduled and will simply starve, for no apparent reason.
>
> Complete and utterly miserable position.
>
> And it makes sense to write LBR tools because they cover a much greater
> spread of hardware.


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2014-01-08 10:21    [W:0.147 / U:0.576 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site