On Mon, Sep 21, 2020 at 04:41:00PM +0100, Alexandru Elisei wrote: > On 9/21/20 2:59 PM, Will Deacon wrote: > > On Wed, Aug 19, 2020 at 02:34:12PM +0100, Alexandru Elisei wrote: > >> The series makes the arm_pmu driver use NMIs for the perf interrupt when > >> NMIs are available on the platform (currently, only arm64 + GICv3). To make > >> it easier to play with the patches, I've pushed a branch at [1]: > > This mostly looks good to me, but see some of the comments I left on the > > code. One other thing I'm not sure about is whether or not we should tell > > userspace that we're using an NMI for the sampling. Do any other > > architectures have a conditional NMI? > > I'm not sure about other architectures being able to configure the perf > interrupt > as NMI or a regular interrupt, I'll try to find out. Regardless of what the > other > architecture do, I am of the opinion that we should spell out explicitly when > the > PMU is using pseudo-NMIs, because it makes a huge difference in the accuracy > of > the instrumentation and the overall usefulness of perf. > > If I spin a v7 quickly, is it still time to merge the series for 5.10?
I'm on holiday for the rest of the week, but please post something when you have it and I'll queue it if I manage to get to it. Will
