Re: perf_counters issue with enable_on_exec

[Paul Mackerras]

stephane eranian writes:

> As you indicated the issue is with the timing information and I think
> it is not related to enable_on_exec. It is more related to the fact
> that to enable a group with a single ioctl() you enable ALL BUT the
> leader. But that means that the time_enabled for the !leader is
> ticking. Thus scaling won't be as expected yet it is correct
> given what happens internally.

No, time_enabled shouldn't be increasing for a counter that's in a
group whose leader is disabled.

I'll try out your test program today.

> I think there needs to be a distinction between 'enabled immediately
> but cannot run because group is not totally enabled' and 'cannot run
> because the group has been multiplexed out yet all could be dispatched
> because all events were dispatched'. In the former, it seems you don't
> want time_enabled to tick, while in the latter you do. In other words,
> time_enabled ticks for each event if the group is 'dispatch-able' (or
> runnable in your terminology) otherwise it does not. time_enabled reflects
> the fact that the group could run but did not have access to the PMU
> resource because of contention with other groups.

Right.  That is exactly what the code is supposed to do.  If it
doesn't there's a bug.

Paul.
--
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/