| Message ID | 1370843609-32618-3-git-send-email-khandual@linux.vnet.ibm.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | Accepted, archived |
| Headers | show |
Anshuman Khandual <khandual@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote: > When the task moves around the system, the corresponding cpuhw > per cpu strcuture should be popullated with the BHRB filter > request value so that PMU could be configured appropriately with > that during the next call into power_pmu_enable(). > > Signed-off-by: Anshuman Khandual <khandual@linux.vnet.ibm.com> benh you might want to fix the spelling mistakes above strcuture -> structure popullated -> populated Otherwise: Acked-by: Michael Neuling <mikey@neuling.org> > --- > arch/powerpc/perf/core-book3s.c | 5 ++++- > 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/arch/powerpc/perf/core-book3s.c b/arch/powerpc/perf/core-book3s.c > index 426180b..48c68a8 100644 > --- a/arch/powerpc/perf/core-book3s.c > +++ b/arch/powerpc/perf/core-book3s.c > @@ -1122,8 +1122,11 @@ nocheck: > > ret = 0; > out: > - if (has_branch_stack(event)) > + if (has_branch_stack(event)) { > power_pmu_bhrb_enable(event); > + cpuhw->bhrb_filter = ppmu->bhrb_filter_map( > + event->attr.branch_sample_type); > + } > > perf_pmu_enable(event->pmu); > local_irq_restore(flags); > -- > 1.7.11.7 >
On 06/24/2013 12:50 PM, Michael Neuling wrote: > Anshuman Khandual <khandual@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote: > >> When the task moves around the system, the corresponding cpuhw >> per cpu strcuture should be popullated with the BHRB filter >> request value so that PMU could be configured appropriately with >> that during the next call into power_pmu_enable(). >> >> Signed-off-by: Anshuman Khandual <khandual@linux.vnet.ibm.com> > > benh you might want to fix the spelling mistakes above > > strcuture -> structure > popullated -> populated > > Otherwise: > > Acked-by: Michael Neuling <mikey@neuling.org> Hey Ben, These patches have not been applied yet. Would like me to correct these spellings myself and send out again. Please do let me know. Thanks ! Regards Anshuman
On Mon, 2013-07-22 at 12:09 +0530, Anshuman Khandual wrote: > These patches have not been applied yet. Would like me to correct > these spellings myself and send out again. Please do let me know. > Thanks ! No, it's ok, I'll add them to my batch. Usually I assume that perf related stuff goes through acme's perf tree so I might have overlooked them because of that. Michael, you're ok with these ? Cheers, Ben
On Mon, Jul 22, 2013 at 04:48:16PM +1000, Benjamin Herrenschmidt wrote: > On Mon, 2013-07-22 at 12:09 +0530, Anshuman Khandual wrote: > > These patches have not been applied yet. Would like me to correct > > these spellings myself and send out again. Please do let me know. > > Thanks ! > > No, it's ok, I'll add them to my batch. > > Usually I assume that perf related stuff goes through acme's perf tree > so I might have overlooked them because of that. > > Michael, you're ok with these ? Which Michael? :) I haven't had time to really get my head around the BHRB code, so I can't really say. cheers
diff --git a/arch/powerpc/perf/core-book3s.c b/arch/powerpc/perf/core-book3s.c index 426180b..48c68a8 100644 --- a/arch/powerpc/perf/core-book3s.c +++ b/arch/powerpc/perf/core-book3s.c @@ -1122,8 +1122,11 @@ nocheck: ret = 0; out: - if (has_branch_stack(event)) + if (has_branch_stack(event)) { power_pmu_bhrb_enable(event); + cpuhw->bhrb_filter = ppmu->bhrb_filter_map( + event->attr.branch_sample_type); + } perf_pmu_enable(event->pmu); local_irq_restore(flags);
When the task moves around the system, the corresponding cpuhw per cpu strcuture should be popullated with the BHRB filter request value so that PMU could be configured appropriately with that during the next call into power_pmu_enable(). Signed-off-by: Anshuman Khandual <khandual@linux.vnet.ibm.com> --- arch/powerpc/perf/core-book3s.c | 5 ++++- 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)