public inbox for linuxppc-dev@ozlabs.org 
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Scott Wood <scottwood@freescale•com>
To: Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba•org>
Cc: linuxppc-dev@ozlabs•org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] perf_event: e500 support
Date: Thu, 11 Feb 2010 10:56:28 -0600	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <4B7436BC.10406@freescale.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20100211030143.GA11245@brick.ozlabs.ibm.com>

Paul Mackerras wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 10, 2010 at 06:06:10PM -0600, Scott Wood wrote:
> 
>> Paul Mackerras wrote:
>>>> Some limitations:
>>>> - No threshold support -- need to figure out how to represent it in
>>>>  the event struct from userspace.
>>> What does "threshold support" mean in this context?  Does it mean
>>> something different from getting an interrupt after N events have been
>>> counted?  Or does it mean counting instances where something takes
>>> longer than a specific number of cycles?
>> The latter.
> 
> OK.  I handled that on classic by using some extra high bits in the
> event config for the threshold value. 

OK.

> If you have a single threshold
> value in hardware but more than one event that uses that threshold
> value, then you will need to add a constraint that all threshold
> events have to specify the same threshold.

There's a separate threshold for each counter.

> So, it sounds like you have a class of events which are the
> thresholding events, and two constraints:
> 
> * at most two events in the thresholding event class
> * at most four events in total
> 
> Are there other constraints?  Apart from the thresholding events, can
> any event go on any counter, or can some events only be counted on one
> particular counter?

No, those are the only constraints.

> If your constraints are just the two listed above (<= 2 threshold
> events, <= 4 events total), then doing it the obvious straightforward
> way is fine.  If there are other constraints as well, such as certain
> events only being available on one specific PMC, then you should
> consider reusing the constraint checking machinery from ppc64.

I'll stick with the straightforward approach then.  If future chips have 
more complicated constraints we can revisit using the more general scheme.

-Scott

  reply	other threads:[~2010-02-11 16:57 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2010-01-15 21:43 [PATCH] perf_event: e500 support Scott Wood
2010-02-10 22:29 ` Paul Mackerras
2010-02-11  0:06   ` Scott Wood
2010-02-11  3:01     ` Paul Mackerras
2010-02-11 16:56       ` Scott Wood [this message]
2010-02-18  3:33         ` Kumar Gala
2010-02-18  9:27           ` Paul Mackerras
2010-02-18  3:29     ` Kumar Gala

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=4B7436BC.10406@freescale.com \
    --to=scottwood@freescale$(echo .)com \
    --cc=linuxppc-dev@ozlabs$(echo .)org \
    --cc=paulus@samba$(echo .)org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox