oprofile and ARM A9 hardware counter
Will Deacon
will.deacon at arm.com
Thu Feb 16 13:08:41 EST 2012
On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 04:37:35PM +0000, Ming Lei wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 17, 2012 at 12:19 AM, Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra at chello.nl> wrote:
> > On Fri, 2012-02-17 at 00:12 +0800, Ming Lei wrote:
> >> is triggered: u64 delta = 100 - 1000000 = 18446744073708551716.
> >
> > on x86 we do:
> >
> > int shift = 64 - x86_pmu.cntval_bits;
> > s64 delta;
> >
> > delta = (new_raw_count << shift) - (prev_raw_count << shift);
> > delta >>= shift;
> >
> > This deals with short overflows (on x86 the registers are typically 40
> > or 48 bits wide). If the arm register is 32 you can of course also get
> > there with some u32 casts.
>
> Good idea, but it may not work if new_raw_count is bigger than prev_raw_count.
The more I think about this, the more I think that the overflow parameter to
armpmu_event_update needs to go. It was introduced to prevent massive event
loss in non-sampling mode, but I think we can get around that by changing
the default sample_period to be half of the max_period, therefore giving
ourselves a much better chance of handling the interrupt before new wraps
around past prev.
Ming Lei - can you try the following please? If it works for you, then I'll
do it properly and kill the overflow parameter altogether.
Thanks,
Will
git a/arch/arm/kernel/perf_event.c b/arch/arm/kernel/perf_event.c
index 5bb91bf..ef597a3 100644
--- a/arch/arm/kernel/perf_event.c
+++ b/arch/arm/kernel/perf_event.c
@@ -193,13 +193,7 @@ again:
new_raw_count) != prev_raw_count)
goto again;
- new_raw_count &= armpmu->max_period;
- prev_raw_count &= armpmu->max_period;
-
- if (overflow)
- delta = armpmu->max_period - prev_raw_count + new_raw_count + 1;
- else
- delta = new_raw_count - prev_raw_count;
+ delta = (new_raw_count - prev_raw_count) & armpmu->max_period;
local64_add(delta, &event->count);
local64_sub(delta, &hwc->period_left);
@@ -518,7 +512,7 @@ __hw_perf_event_init(struct perf_event *event)
hwc->config_base |= (unsigned long)mapping;
if (!hwc->sample_period) {
- hwc->sample_period = armpmu->max_period;
+ hwc->sample_period = armpmu->max_period >> 1;
hwc->last_period = hwc->sample_period;
local64_set(&hwc->period_left, hwc->sample_period);
}
More information about the linux-arm-kernel
mailing list