On Wed, Aug 26, 2015 at 01:21:08PM +0000, Alexey Brodkin wrote:
> Hi Peter,
>
> On Wed, 2015-08-26 at 15:12 +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Mon, Aug 24, 2015 at 05:20:20PM +0300, Alexey Brodkin wrote:
> > > @@ -295,6 +317,16 @@ static int arc_pmu_add(struct perf_event *event, int flags)
> > > }
> > >
> > > write_aux_reg(ARC_REG_PCT_INDEX, idx);
> > > +
> > > + arc_pmu->act_counter[idx] = event;
> > > +
> > > + if (is_sampling_event(event)) {
> > > + /* Mimic full counter overflow as other arches do */
> > > + write_aux_reg(ARC_REG_PCT_INT_CNTL, (u32)arc_pmu->max_period);
> > > + write_aux_reg(ARC_REG_PCT_INT_CNTH,
> > > + (arc_pmu->max_period >> 32));
> > > + }
> > > +
> >
> > pmu::add should call pmu::start when PERF_EF_START, without that it
> > should not start the counter, only schedule it.
> >
> > (although currently all pmu::add() calls will have EF_START set)
>
> And that's what we do, don't we?
> ----------------------->8-----------------------
> if (flags & PERF_EF_START)
> arc_pmu_start(event, PERF_EF_RELOAD);
> ----------------------->8-----------------------
>
D'uh indeed! I read that above as enabling it, while what it really does
it simply program the interrupt thresholds.
--
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
