* Stephane Eranian <eran...@google.com> wrote:
> On Mon, May 6, 2013 at 8:52 PM, Peter Zijlstra <pet...@infradead.org> wrote:
> > On Mon, May 06, 2013 at 07:44:19PM +0200, Stephane Eranian wrote:
> >> On Thu, May 2, 2013 at 9:37 AM, Peter Zijlstra <pet...@infradead.org>
> >> wrote:
> >> > On Wed, Apr 24, 2013 at 04:04:54PM -0700, Andi Kleen wrote:
> >> >> From: Andi Kleen <a...@linux.intel.com>
> >> >>
> >> >> The PEBS documentation in the Intel SDM 18.6.1.1 states:
> >> >>
> >> >> """
> >> >> PEBS events are only valid when the following fields of
> >> >> IA32_PERFEVTSELx are all
> >> >> zero: AnyThread, Edge, Invert, CMask.
> >> >> """
> >> >>
> >> >> Since we had problems with this earlier, don't allow cmask, any, edge,
> >> >> invert
> >> >> as raw events, except for the ones explicitly listed as pebs_aliases.
> >> >
> >> > If its a simple matter of crap in crap out without affecting anything
> >> > else we
> >> > shouldn't do anything.
> >> >
> >> The problem here is that you are sampling an instruction which did not
> >> cause
> >> the event you are measuring. Remember that using cmask, changes the
> >> nature of what's being measured (from event to cycles).
> >
> > Yeah.. I don't see the problem though. If you're using cmask and the like
> > you're supposed to know wth you're doing; which includes knowing your cpu
> > and
> > what it thinks of such an event.
>
> But that implies that you'd know that on Intel precise mode uses PEBS
> and that PEBS does not take cmask events. That seems to contradict the
> philosophy of perf_events where the kernel does the work for you.
Also, this code only runs when the event is set up, so a bit of sanity
checking can only help, right?
Thanks,
Ingo
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
