Date: Fri, 22 Mar 2013 10:33:26 -0700
From: Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com>
To: Stephane Eranian <eranian@google.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, peterz@infradead.org, mingo@elte.hu,
        acme@redhat.com, jolsa@redhat.com, namhyung.kim@lge.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 0/2] perf: use hrtimer for event multiplexing
Message-ID: <20130322173326.GN19692@tassilo.jf.intel.com>
References: <1363949499-3728-1-git-send-email-eranian@google.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <1363949499-3728-1-git-send-email-eranian@google.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 945
Lines: 22

On Fri, Mar 22, 2013 at 11:51:37AM +0100, Stephane Eranian wrote:
> The current scheme of using the timer tick was fine
> for per-thread events. However, it was causing
> bias issues in system-wide mode (including for
> uncore PMUs). Event groups would not get their
> fair share of runtime on the PMU. With tickless
> kernels, if a core is idle there is no timer tick,
> and thus no event rotation (multiplexing). However,
> there are events (especially uncore events) which do
> count even though cores are asleep.

Would it be possible to only do this when uncore events
are active? Otherwise it may have a large power cost
and actually change results, as the core counters
will tick more.

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