| Message ID | 1259165529.16349.191.camel@lexx (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | Accepted, archived |
| Commit | 25ef231de2678690198d95dca949c3caa67a76de |
| Delegated to: | Benjamin Herrenschmidt |
| Headers | show |
On Wed, 2009-11-25 at 10:12 -0600, Will Schmidt wrote: > Tested-by: Will Schmidt <will_schmidt@vnet.ibm.com> > Signed-off-by: Will Schmidt <will_schmidt@vnet.ibm.com> Isn't it assumed that the one that made the patch also tested it? Well I would hope that is the norm. -- Steve
Hi Will, > The tb_total and purr_total values reported via the hcall_stats code > should be cumulative, rather than being replaced by the latest delta tb > or purr value. > > Tested-by: Will Schmidt <will_schmidt@vnet.ibm.com> > Signed-off-by: Will Schmidt <will_schmidt@vnet.ibm.com> Ouch! Nice catch. Acked-by: Anton Blanchard <anton@samba.org> Anton > [ This is a touch-up to the "[3/6] powerpc: tracing: Add hypervisor call > tracepoints" patch submitted by Anton a few weeks back, so I've copied > folks Anton had on CC for his original patch, this fix is rather ppc > specific, so can probably go in via the ppc tree, but I've no real > preference. ] > > diff --git a/arch/powerpc/platforms/pseries/hvCall_inst.c b/arch/powerpc/platforms/pseries/hvCall_inst.c > index 2f58c71..1fefae7 100644 > --- a/arch/powerpc/platforms/pseries/hvCall_inst.c > +++ b/arch/powerpc/platforms/pseries/hvCall_inst.c > @@ -124,8 +124,8 @@ static void probe_hcall_exit(unsigned long opcode, unsigned long retval, > > h = &__get_cpu_var(hcall_stats)[opcode / 4]; > h->num_calls++; > - h->tb_total = mftb() - h->tb_start; > - h->purr_total = mfspr(SPRN_PURR) - h->purr_start; > + h->tb_total += mftb() - h->tb_start; > + h->purr_total += mfspr(SPRN_PURR) - h->purr_start; > > put_cpu_var(hcall_stats); > } >
On Wed, 2009-11-25 at 16:19 -0500, Steven Rostedt wrote: > On Wed, 2009-11-25 at 10:12 -0600, Will Schmidt wrote: > > > Tested-by: Will Schmidt <will_schmidt@vnet.ibm.com> > > Signed-off-by: Will Schmidt <will_schmidt@vnet.ibm.com> > > Isn't it assumed that the one that made the patch also tested it? Well I > would hope that is the norm. I like to make that assumption, but wanted to be clear on the point for anyone with doubts. :-) > > -- Steve > >
diff --git a/arch/powerpc/platforms/pseries/hvCall_inst.c b/arch/powerpc/platforms/pseries/hvCall_inst.c index 2f58c71..1fefae7 100644 --- a/arch/powerpc/platforms/pseries/hvCall_inst.c +++ b/arch/powerpc/platforms/pseries/hvCall_inst.c @@ -124,8 +124,8 @@ static void probe_hcall_exit(unsigned long opcode, unsigned long retval, h = &__get_cpu_var(hcall_stats)[opcode / 4]; h->num_calls++; - h->tb_total = mftb() - h->tb_start; - h->purr_total = mfspr(SPRN_PURR) - h->purr_start; + h->tb_total += mftb() - h->tb_start; + h->purr_total += mfspr(SPRN_PURR) - h->purr_start; put_cpu_var(hcall_stats); }