From: Arjan van de Ven <arjan@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> Date: Thu, 4 Dec 2008 23:02:06 -0800 > On Fri, 5 Dec 2008 07:31:31 +0100 > Ingo Molnar <mingo@xxxxxxx> wrote: > > > Btw., i'm curious, why would we want to do that? It skews the results > > if the task continues executing and counters stop. To get the highest > > quality profiling output the counters should follow the true state of > > the task that is profiled - and events should be passed to the > > monitoring task asynchronously. The _events_ can contain precise > > coupled information > > - but the counters should continue. > > btw stopping the task on counter overflow is an issue for things that > want to self profile, like JITs They can fork off a thread to do this. No blocking on couter overflow leads to inaccurate results. This is a pretty fundamental aspect of perf counter usage. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-arch" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
