Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752310AbaAMVVx (ORCPT ); Mon, 13 Jan 2014 16:21:53 -0500 Received: from e39.co.us.ibm.com ([32.97.110.160]:55689 "EHLO e39.co.us.ibm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751768AbaAMVVw (ORCPT ); Mon, 13 Jan 2014 16:21:52 -0500 Message-ID: <52D458E8.70203@linux.vnet.ibm.com> Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2014 13:21:44 -0800 From: Cody P Schafer User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.2.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Peter Zijlstra CC: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo , Paul Mackerras , Ingo Molnar , LKML Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] perf: clarify comment regarding event merging References: <1389311492-5059-1-git-send-email-cody@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <1389311492-5059-3-git-send-email-cody@linux.vnet.ibm.com> <20140110093635.GI31570@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> In-Reply-To: <20140110093635.GI31570@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-TM-AS-MML: disable X-Content-Scanned: Fidelis XPS MAILER x-cbid: 14011321-9332-0000-0000-000002BF6805 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 01/10/2014 01:36 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Thu, Jan 09, 2014 at 03:51:31PM -0800, Cody P Schafer wrote: >> There are actually 2 things about software events that allow us to >> merge them: they never fail to schedule _and_ they have transaction >> handlers we can (and do, when they are added to !sw groups) ignore. Note >> both of these in the comment on adding sw events to !sw groups. > > The latter is a direct consequence of the former. Since they can always > be scheduled, they don't need any schedulability testing, and therefore > the transaction stuff is useless. Right. I guess what I was getting at were the 2 types of "schedulability": 1. individual event schedulability (ie: "did add() return an error?") 2. txn schedulability (ie: "did commit_txn() return an error?") I'm in the process of adding a pmu which guarantees #1, but not #2 (it essentially provides access to some always-running counters which can be atomically copied in groups). As a result, I'm teasing apart some of the special casing done for sw events. This will probably make a bit more sense with some better terminology on my part and some actual code. I'll update and resend later. -- 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/