On Mon, 2017-11-20 at 12:57 +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 17, 2017 at 05:54:05PM -0800, Megha Dey wrote:
> > +   mutex_lock(&bm_counter_mutex);
> > +   for (i = 0; i < BM_MAX_COUNTERS; i++) {
> > +           if (bm_counter_owner[i] == NULL) {
> > +                   counter_to_use = i;
> > +                   bm_counter_owner[i] = event;
> > +                   break;
> > +           }
> > +   }
> > +   mutex_unlock(&bm_counter_mutex);
> > +
> > +   if (counter_to_use == -1)
> > +           return -EBUSY;
> 
> > +static struct pmu intel_bm_pmu = {
> > +   .task_ctx_nr     = perf_sw_context,
> > +   .attr_groups     = intel_bm_attr_groups,
> > +   .event_init      = intel_bm_event_init,
> > +   .add             = intel_bm_event_add,
> > +   .del             = intel_bm_event_del,
> > +};
> 
> Still horrid.. still no.

It seems like perf_invalid_context does not support per task monitoring:
find_get_context():
 ctxn = pmu->task_ctx_nr;
        if (ctxn < 0)
                goto errout;

Also, perf_hw_context is to be used only for core PMU, correct?

That leaves us with only perf_sw_context to be used. Not sure if a new
context needs to be implemented.


--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-doc" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Reply via email to