Re: [tip:perf/core] perf/x86: Use INST_RETIRED.PREC_DIST for cycles: ppp
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
- Subject: Re: [tip:perf/core] perf/x86: Use INST_RETIRED.PREC_DIST for cycles: ppp
- From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 6 Dec 2015 23:06:51 +0100
- Cc: vincent.weaver@xxxxxxxxx, jolsa@xxxxxxxxxx, torvalds@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, eranian@xxxxxxxxxx, tglx@xxxxxxxxxxxxx, acme@xxxxxxxxxx, ak@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, hpa@xxxxxxxxx, linux-tip-commits@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- In-reply-to: <20151206131102.GA12167@gmail.com>
- User-agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2012-12-30)
On Sun, Dec 06, 2015 at 02:11:02PM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> Also, I'm not convinced we need a new 'ppp' qualifier for any of this, why not
> just replace 'pp' with this event - 'pp' is meant to be our most precise event.
I requested this because the PREC_DIST events can only be scheduled on a
single counter, whereas the existing :pp events can be had on all 4.
This mean you can have 2 concurrent :pp users (without RR), but not :ppp.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-tip-commits" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
[Index of Archives]
[Linux Stable Commits]
[Linux Stable Kernel]
[Linux Kernel]
[Linux USB Devel]
[Linux Video &Media]
[Linux Audio Users]
[Yosemite News]
[Linux SCSI]
