Re: [tip:perfcounters/core] perf_counter: x86: Fix call-chainsupport to use NMI-safe methods
From: Mathieu Desnoyers
Date: Mon Jun 15 2009 - 15:27:41 EST
* H. Peter Anvin (hpa@xxxxxxxxx) wrote:
> Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Mon, 2009-06-15 at 14:59 -0400, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
> >> * Peter Zijlstra (a.p.zijlstra@xxxxxxxxx) wrote:
> >>> On Mon, 2009-06-15 at 14:48 -0400, Mathieu Desnoyers wrote:
> >>>> we should not care that much about the performance hit of
> >>>> saving/restoring the cr2 register at each nmi entry/exit.
> >>> But we do, perf counters very much cares about nmi performance.
> >> To a point where it cannot afford a simple register save/restore ?
> >> There is "caring" and "_caring_". I am tempted to ask what NMI handler
> >> execution frequency you have in mind here to figure out if we are not
> >> trying to optimize sub-nanoseconds per minutes. ;)
> > Ah, well, I have no idea who expensive cr2 is, if its like a regular
> > register then it should be fine. If however its tons more expensive then
> > we should really avoid it.
> > As to the freq, 100kHz would be nice ;-)
> Writing control registers is serializing, so it's a lot more expensive
> than writing a normal register; my *guess* is that it will be on the
> order of 100-200 cycles.
> That is not based on any actual information.
Then how about just writing to the cr2 register *if* it has changed
while the NMI handler was running ?
if (unlikely(read_cr2() != saved_cr2)))
OpenPGP key fingerprint: 8CD5 52C3 8E3C 4140 715F BA06 3F25 A8FE 3BAE 9A68
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/