Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 25 Mar 2022 11:11:28 -0400 | Subject | Re: [PATCH v3 3/5] perf/core: Don't need event_filter_match in merge_sched_in() | From | "Liang, Kan" <> |
| |
On 3/24/2022 11:53 PM, Chengming Zhou wrote: > There is one obselete comment in perf_cgroup_switch(), since > we don't use event_filter_match() when event_sched_out(). > > Then found we needn't to use event_filter_match() in > merge_sched_in() too. Because now we use the perf_event groups > RB-tree to get the exact matched perf_events, don't need to > go through the event_filter_match() to check if matched again. > > Signed-off-by: Chengming Zhou <zhouchengming@bytedance.com> > --- > kernel/events/core.c | 6 ++---- > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/kernel/events/core.c b/kernel/events/core.c > index dd985c77bc37..225d408deb1a 100644 > --- a/kernel/events/core.c > +++ b/kernel/events/core.c > @@ -856,7 +856,8 @@ static void perf_cgroup_switch(struct task_struct *task, int mode) > cpu_ctx_sched_out(cpuctx, EVENT_ALL); > /* > * must not be done before ctxswout due > - * to event_filter_match() in event_sched_out() > + * to update_cgrp_time_from_cpuctx() in > + * ctx_sched_out() > */ > cpuctx->cgrp = NULL; > } > @@ -3804,9 +3805,6 @@ static int merge_sched_in(struct perf_event *event, void *data) > if (event->state <= PERF_EVENT_STATE_OFF) > return 0; > > - if (!event_filter_match(event)) > - return 0; > -
Both X86 and Arm implemented PMU specific filter_match callback for the hybrid system. I think the check is still required at least for the hybrid system.
Thanks, Kan > if (group_can_go_on(event, cpuctx, *can_add_hw)) { > if (!group_sched_in(event, cpuctx, ctx)) > list_add_tail(&event->active_list, get_event_list(event));
| |