Hi, On 12.12.2018 15:15, Jiri Olsa wrote: > On Wed, Dec 12, 2018 at 10:40:22AM +0300, Alexey Budankov wrote: > > SNIP > >> int perf_mmap__mmap(struct perf_mmap *map, struct mmap_params *mp, int fd, >> int cpu) >> { >> + int c, nr_cpus, node; >> /* >> * The last one will be done at perf_mmap__consume(), so that we >> * make sure we don't prevent tools from consuming every last event in >> @@ -344,6 +369,17 @@ int perf_mmap__mmap(struct perf_mmap *map, struct >> mmap_params *mp, int fd, int c >> map->cpu = cpu; >> >> CPU_ZERO(&map->affinity_mask); >> + if (mp->affinity == PERF_AFFINITY_NODE && cpu__max_node() > 1) { >> + nr_cpus = cpu_map__nr(mp->cpu_map); >> + node = cpu__get_node(map->cpu); >> + for (c = 0; c < nr_cpus; c++) { >> + if (cpu__get_node(c) == node) { >> + CPU_SET(c, &map->affinity_mask); >> + } >> + } >> + } else if (mp->affinity == PERF_AFFINITY_CPU) { >> + CPU_SET(map->cpu, &map->affinity_mask); >> + } > > won't both of this end up in same mask?
For tested dual socket 44 core broadwell: node 0 node 1 cpu mask 0-21,44-65 22-43,66-87 For affinity=node map->affinity_mask is either [0-21,44-65] or [22-43,66-87]. For affinity=cpu map->affinity_mask is [0] or [1] or [2] and so on. Without affinity option set map->affinity_mask and record->affinity_mask are []. Thanks, Alexey > > jirka >