lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2014]   [Feb]   [9]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
Patch in this message
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH v1 01/10] perf/x86/uncore: fix initialization of cpumask
why not something like below. I think it's simpler.

---
diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/perf_event_intel_uncore.c b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/perf_event_intel_uncore.c
index 29c2487..169ef4a 100644
--- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/perf_event_intel_uncore.c
+++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/perf_event_intel_uncore.c
@@ -3799,9 +3799,6 @@ static int __init uncore_cpu_init(void)
ivt_uncore_cbox.num_boxes = max_cores;
msr_uncores = ivt_msr_uncores;
break;
-
- default:
- return 0;
}

ret = uncore_types_init(msr_uncores);

Regards
Yan, Zheng


On 02/03/2014 08:55 PM, Stephane Eranian wrote:
> On certain processors, the uncore PMU boxes may only be
> msr-bsed or PCI-based. But in both cases, the cpumask,
> suggesting on which CPUs to monitor to get full coverage
> of the particular PMU, must be created.
>
> However with the current code base, the cpumask was only
> created on processor which had at least one MSR-based
> uncore PMU. This patch removes that restriction and
> ensures the cpumask is created even when there is no
> msr-based PMU. For instance, on SNB client where only
> a PCI-based memory controller PMU is supported.
>
> Signed-off-by: Stephane Eranian <eranian@google.com>
> ---
> arch/x86/kernel/cpu/perf_event_intel_uncore.c | 61 +++++++++++++++----------
> 1 file changed, 37 insertions(+), 24 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/perf_event_intel_uncore.c b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/perf_event_intel_uncore.c
> index 29c2487..fe4255b 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/perf_event_intel_uncore.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/kernel/cpu/perf_event_intel_uncore.c
> @@ -3764,7 +3764,7 @@ static void __init uncore_cpu_setup(void *dummy)
>
> static int __init uncore_cpu_init(void)
> {
> - int ret, cpu, max_cores;
> + int ret, max_cores;
>
> max_cores = boot_cpu_data.x86_max_cores;
> switch (boot_cpu_data.x86_model) {
> @@ -3808,29 +3808,6 @@ static int __init uncore_cpu_init(void)
> if (ret)
> return ret;
>
> - get_online_cpus();
> -
> - for_each_online_cpu(cpu) {
> - int i, phys_id = topology_physical_package_id(cpu);
> -
> - for_each_cpu(i, &uncore_cpu_mask) {
> - if (phys_id == topology_physical_package_id(i)) {
> - phys_id = -1;
> - break;
> - }
> - }
> - if (phys_id < 0)
> - continue;
> -
> - uncore_cpu_prepare(cpu, phys_id);
> - uncore_event_init_cpu(cpu);
> - }
> - on_each_cpu(uncore_cpu_setup, NULL, 1);
> -
> - register_cpu_notifier(&uncore_cpu_nb);
> -
> - put_online_cpus();
> -
> return 0;
> }
>
> @@ -3859,6 +3836,41 @@ static int __init uncore_pmus_register(void)
> return 0;
> }
>
> +static void uncore_cpumask_init(void)
> +{
> + int cpu;
> +
> + /*
> + * ony invoke once from msr or pci init code
> + */
> + if (!cpumask_empty(&uncore_cpu_mask))
> + return;
> +
> + get_online_cpus();
> +
> + for_each_online_cpu(cpu) {
> + int i, phys_id = topology_physical_package_id(cpu);
> +
> + for_each_cpu(i, &uncore_cpu_mask) {
> + if (phys_id == topology_physical_package_id(i)) {
> + phys_id = -1;
> + break;
> + }
> + }
> + if (phys_id < 0)
> + continue;
> +
> + uncore_cpu_prepare(cpu, phys_id);
> + uncore_event_init_cpu(cpu);
> + }
> + on_each_cpu(uncore_cpu_setup, NULL, 1);
> +
> + register_cpu_notifier(&uncore_cpu_nb);
> +
> + put_online_cpus();
> +}
> +
> +
> static int __init intel_uncore_init(void)
> {
> int ret;
> @@ -3877,6 +3889,7 @@ static int __init intel_uncore_init(void)
> uncore_pci_exit();
> goto fail;
> }
> + uncore_cpumask_init();
>
> uncore_pmus_register();
> return 0;
>



\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2014-02-10 05:01    [W:0.107 / U:0.224 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site