On Wed, 5 Mar 2014, Mike Travis wrote: > I haven't had much chance yet to look over your proposed changes but > FYI, the counters are strictly feedback to insure that there are not > unhandled NMI events from the perf subsystem. The exact count is > irrelevant. IOW, counts in the double or triple digits is okay, > counts > 100,000 is definitely not okay (there are multiple millions > of perf events every 'perf top' refresh.) > > I'm not sure if this alters how you want to approach the changes.
Gotta patch here that converts all the atomic per cpu counters to int but the local64_t definitions look very strange to me. I have never seen a local64_t definition that is global and used for a counters. That can only work if there is only one and exactly one processor that is modifying the count. -- 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/