Re: [PATCH 0/3 v2] nmi perf fixes

[Stephane Eranian]

On Fri, Sep 10, 2010 at 1:41 PM, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Thu, 2010-09-02 at 15:07 -0400, Don Zickus wrote:
>> Fixes to allow unknown nmis to pass through the perf nmi handler instead
>> of being swallowed. ÂContains patches that are already in Ingo's tree. ÂAdded
>> here for completeness. ÂBased on ingo/tip
>>
>> Tested on intel/amd
>>
>> v2: patch cleanups and consolidation, no code changes
>>
>> Don Zickus (1):
>> Â perf, x86: Fix accidentally ack'ing a second event on intel perf
>> Â Â counter
>>
>> Peter Zijlstra (1):
>> Â perf, x86: Fix handle_irq return values
>>
>> Robert Richter (1):
>> Â perf, x86: Try to handle unknown nmis with an enabled PMU
>>
>> Âarch/x86/kernel/cpu/perf_event.c    |  59 +++++++++++++++++++++++++-------
>> Âarch/x86/kernel/cpu/perf_event_intel.c | Â 15 +++++---
>> Âarch/x86/kernel/cpu/perf_event_p4.c  Â|  Â2 +-
>> Â3 files changed, 56 insertions(+), 20 deletions(-)
>
> Both Ingo and I are getting Dazed and confused on our AMD machines, it
> started before yesterday (that is, after backing out all my recent
> changes it still gets dazed), so I suspect this set.
>
> I'll look at getting a trace of the thing, but if any of you has a
> bright idea...

I still don't buy the back-to-back NMI thing. I suspect there is
something else going on. I have continued to track it down.
I got closer yesterday, until I ran into other issues. It may
have to do with throttling. I am still trying to understanding
why the OVF_STATUS does not match the check based on
the counter values.

>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/