Re: [PATCH v2 1/1] perf: Sharing PMU counters across compatible events
From: Song Liu
Date: Tue Sep 11 2018 - 09:39:22 EST
> On Sep 10, 2018, at 1:15 AM, Jiri Olsa <jolsa@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Aug 30, 2018 at 06:51:07PM +0000, Song Liu wrote:
>>
>>
>>> On Aug 30, 2018, at 8:18 AM, Jiri Olsa <jolsa@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Wed, Aug 15, 2018 at 10:03:13AM -0700, Song Liu wrote:
>>>
>>> SNIP
>>>
>>>> @@ -6100,7 +6333,7 @@ static void perf_output_read_group(struct perf_output_handle *handle,
>>>>
>>>> if ((sub != event) &&
>>>> (sub->state == PERF_EVENT_STATE_ACTIVE))
>>>> - sub->pmu->read(sub);
>>>> + event_pmu_read(sub);
>>>>
>>>> values[n++] = perf_event_count(sub);
>>>> if (read_format & PERF_FORMAT_ID)
>>>> @@ -9109,7 +9342,7 @@ static enum hrtimer_restart perf_swevent_hrtimer(struct hrtimer *hrtimer)
>>>> if (event->state != PERF_EVENT_STATE_ACTIVE)
>>>> return HRTIMER_NORESTART;
>>>>
>>>> - event->pmu->read(event);
>>>> + event_pmu_read(event);
>>>>
>>>> perf_sample_data_init(&data, 0, event->hw.last_period);
>>>> regs = get_irq_regs();
>>>> @@ -10504,6 +10737,14 @@ SYSCALL_DEFINE5(perf_event_open,
>>>> goto err_cred;
>>>> }
>>>>
>>>> + if (perf_event_can_share(event)) {
>>>> + event->tmp_master = perf_event_alloc(&event->attr, cpu,
>>>> + task, NULL, NULL,
>>>> + NULL, NULL, -1);
>>>
>>> can't get around this.. I understand the need, but AFAICS you allocate
>>> the whole 'struct perf_event', just because there's count field in it
>>> otherwise the 'struct hw_perf_event' should be enough to carry all that's
>>> needed to read hw event
>>>
>>> would it be better to move the count to 'struct hw_perf_event' and use
>>> that instead? assuming I'm not missing anything..
>>>
>>> jirka
>>
>> I am trying to make the master event function the same as a real event,
>> while keep dup events as followers. This avoids "switching master" in
>> earlier versions (and Tejun's RFC).
>
> yep, I understand.. still, it seems too much to allocate
> the whole 'struct perf_even't just to get separated 'count'
> variable
In theory, we only need separated counters. However, in practice, there
are other variables we need to handle for a switch_master operation.
For example, we need make sure event->state is always set properly. So
this optimization is not easy to implement. How about we optimize it
after this patch gets in?
Thanks,
Song