lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2015]   [May]   [26]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH v2 01/11] perf,x86: Fix event/group validation
On Tue, May 26, 2015 at 05:25:59AM -0700, Stephane Eranian wrote:
> > IIRC the problem was that the copy from c2 into c1:
> >
> > if (c1 && (c1->flags & PERF_X86_EVENT_DYNAMIC)) {
> > bitmap_copy(c1->idxmsk, c2->idxmsk, X86_PMC_IDX_MAX);
> > c1->weight = c2->weight;
> > c2 = c1;
> > }
> >
> > is incomplete. For instance, flags is not copied, and some code down the
> > line might check that and get wrong flags.
> >
> Ok, now I remember this code. It has to do with incremental scheduling.
> Suppose E1, E2, E3 events where E1 is exclusive. The first call is
> for scheduling E1. It gets to get_event_constraint() which "allocates" a
> dynamic constraint. The second call tries to schedule E1, E2. But the
> second time for E1, you already have the dynamic constraint allocated, so
> this code is reusing the constraint storage and just updates the bitmask
> and weight.
>
> Now, that the storage is not actually dynamic (kmalloc'd), but taken from a
> fixed size array in cpuc, I believe we can simplify this and "re-allocate"
> the constraint for each incremental call to intel_get_event_constraints().
> Do you agree?

That would probably work, the whole incremental thing seems superfluous
to me.


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2015-05-26 15:41    [W:0.065 / U:0.484 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site