Hi Will, Yes, I have achieved full professional redundancy. If only I could do this with girlfriends, I think I could start my own cult. Didn't Hubbard say in one of his early letters to his friends that the only way to really get rich was to start a religion? My apologies to Tom Cruise if you're lurking on this list.
Anyways, back to work. Do you think Fedora would be willing to give us access to a few systems on which we could install the perfmon2 substrate? I don't exactly know who's in charge of that or what relation it has to Redhat. I just checked in a few fixes which should fix a) Stefane's mis-configuring on 2.6.18.1 (I'm guessing the family field in cpuinfo went numeric) b) umask issues with AMD64 and Montecito and c) unavailable PMC's. Robbie is still reporting a few failures on Monte machines, so I suspect a few will fail on others as well. Phil > Virtual employee at three institutions?!! Only three institutions. :) > > Yes, I have had similar issues testing. You end up collecting machines for > this > kind of work, because the development requires root access and there are a > variety of performance monitoring hardware. Getting root access inside a > corporation firewall is a difficult thing. Pretty much have to be an employee > there. Maybe if lucky there are tests systems setup outside the firewall e.g. > Fedora. > > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/FedoraTesting > > I am willing to try things out as needed to help track down these problems. I > would like to see perfmon really get execised and in the upstream kernel. > Having > PAPI use it would be one of the motivations to get it into the kernel. > > I looked at the code in perfmon_rw.c to see what triggers the error message. > It > test to see that the pmc is in range and that the pmc is available. Looking > at > /sys/kernel/perfmon/pmu_desc > > > $ more /sys/kernel/perfmon/pmu_desc/ > counter_width pmc1/ pmc3/ pmd2/ > model pmc2/ pmd1/ pmd3/ > > Notice there is no pmc0 listed. I assume it is being reserved for a watchdog > timer. Doe the PAPI code check to see whether the register is available? > > > > In regards to your lockup, Stefane has informed me that numerous systems > > have issue with printk...I have seen hard lockups with this as well when > > I enabled debugging, both on my p3 laptop and various MIPS beasties > > I thought that the prink went to a circular buffer and there should be a > problem > with lockup. > > > > > BTW, 2 totally unrelated things. a) Did you ever get that message I sent > > from the broadcom guys about fixes to the event maps for pfm? (Which I > > generated from oprofile's files, did you see that script? I've attached > > it for fun. It does not handle umasks.) b) I have updated > > perfmon/oprofile kernel support in my copy of the kernel tree for MIPS. > > I haven't tested it, but will soon. I know there are still a few things > > broken in user land (clockrate for example), but I want to see if at > > least the oprofile+perfmon kernel component is doing the right thing. > > Will keep you posted. > > > > Again, thanks for you help. > > > > phil > _______________________________________________ > perfmon mailing list > [email protected] > http://www.hpl.hp.com/hosted/linux/mail-archives/perfmon/ _______________________________________________ perfmon mailing list [email protected] http://www.hpl.hp.com/hosted/linux/mail-archives/perfmon/
