On Wed, May 20, 2015 at 06:08:02PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> @@ -2062,6 +2081,22 @@ intel_get_excl_constraints(struct cpu_hw_events *cpuc,
> struct perf_event *event,
> */
>
> /*
> + * Do not allow scheduling of more than max_alloc_cntrs
> + * which is set to half the available generic counters.
> + *
> + * This helps avoid counter starvation of sibling thread
> + * by ensuring at most half the counters cannot be in
> + * exclusive mode. There is not designated counters for the
> + * limits. Any N/2 counters can be used. This helps with
> + * events with specifix counter constraints
> + */
> + if (xl->num_alloc_cntrs++ >= xl->max_alloc_cntrs) {
> + /* wipe the GP counters */
> + cx->idxmsk64 &= ~((1ULL << INTEL_PMC_IDX_FIXED) - 1);
> + goto done;
> + }
> +
> + /*
> * Modify static constraint with current dynamic
> * state of thread
> *
While this improves things, its still sub optimal because we should only
increase num_alloc_cntrs when we actually allocate a GP register, but we
do that at commit time and that callback is too late to back out / retry.
So ideally we'd move the callback into scheduling code, but that means
we also have to move the xlo array into the sched_state etc.
[ which brings me to the whole xl vs xlo thing, I think we done that the
wrong way around. It would be more natural to account to xl and create
constraints based on xlo. ]
Secondly, we should only enforce this limit if and when there are
exclusive events on the system I suppose.
I have some ideas on how to go do this, but I need a break..
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
