Re: [PATCH v2 -tip] perf: x86, add SandyBridge support

[Stephane Eranian]

On Mon, Feb 28, 2011 at 3:33 PM, Lin Ming <ming.m.lin@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Mon, 2011-02-28 at 20:25 +0800, Stephane Eranian wrote:
>> On Mon, Feb 28, 2011 at 10:15 AM, Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> > On Mon, 2011-02-28 at 15:22 +0800, Lin Ming wrote:
>> >> This patch adds basic SandyBridge support, including hardware cache
>> >> events and PEBS events support.
>> >>
>> >> LLC-* hareware cache events don't work for now, it depends on the
>> >> offcore patches.
>> >
>> > What's the status of those, Stephane reported some problems last I
>> > remember?
>> >
>> >
>> >> Â#define INTEL_EVENT_CONSTRAINT(c, n) \
>> >> Â Â Â EVENT_CONSTRAINT(c, n, ARCH_PERFMON_EVENTSEL_EVENT)
>> >> +#define INTEL_EVENT_CONSTRAINT2(c, n) Â Â Â Â\
>> >> + Â Â EVENT_CONSTRAINT(c, n, INTEL_ARCH_EVENT_MASK)
>> >
>> > That's a particularly bad name, how about something like
>> >
>> > INTEL_UEVENT_CONSTRAINT or somesuch.
>> >
>> >> @@ -702,7 +738,13 @@ static void intel_ds_init(void)
>> >> Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â printk(KERN_CONT "PEBS fmt1%c, ", pebs_type);
>> >> Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â x86_pmu.pebs_record_size = sizeof(struct pebs_record_nhm);
>> >> Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â x86_pmu.drain_pebs = intel_pmu_drain_pebs_nhm;
>> >> - Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â x86_pmu.pebs_constraints = intel_nehalem_pebs_events;
>> >> + Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â switch (boot_cpu_data.x86_model) {
>> >> + Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â case 42: /* SandyBridge */
>> >> + Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â x86_pmu.pebs_constraints = intel_snb_pebs_events;
>> >> + Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â break;
>> >> + Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â default:
>> >> + Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â x86_pmu.pebs_constraints = intel_nehalem_pebs_events;
>> >> + Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â }
>> >> Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â Â break;
>> >>
>> >> Â Â Â Â Â Â Â default:
>> >
>> > We already have this massive model switch right after this function,
>> > might as well move the pebs constraint assignment there.
>> >
>> My PEBS Âpatch was going to cleanup this part, though it was using
>> it's own switch
>> statement.
>
> Did you send out the patch? A link?
>
For what?

>
>
--
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/