On Mon, Jan 08, 2018 at 07:15:13AM -0800, kan.li...@intel.com wrote:
SNIP
> There is nothing need to do in x86_perf_event_set_period(). Because it
> is fixed period. The period_left is already adjusted.
>
> Signed-off-by: Kan Liang <kan.li...@linux.intel.com>
> ---
> arch/x86/events/intel/ds.c | 69
> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
> 1 file changed, 67 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/arch/x86/events/intel/ds.c b/arch/x86/events/intel/ds.c
> index 3674a4b..cc1f373 100644
> --- a/arch/x86/events/intel/ds.c
> +++ b/arch/x86/events/intel/ds.c
> @@ -1251,17 +1251,82 @@ get_next_pebs_record_by_bit(void *base, void *top,
> int bit)
> return NULL;
> }
>
> +/*
> + * Specific intel_pmu_save_and_restart() for auto-reload.
> + */
> +static int intel_pmu_save_and_restart_reload(struct perf_event *event,
> + u64 reload_val,
> + int reload_times)
> +{
> + struct hw_perf_event *hwc = &event->hw;
> + int shift = 64 - x86_pmu.cntval_bits;
> + u64 prev_raw_count, new_raw_count;
> + u64 delta;
> +
> + if ((reload_times == 0) || (reload_val == 0))
> + return intel_pmu_save_and_restart(event);
why is this check needed? AFAICS __intel_pmu_pebs_event is
called only if reload_times != 0 and reload_val is always
non zero for sampling
jirka
