Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
Date:   Mon, 12 Feb 2018 22:04:42 +0100
From:   Jiri Olsa <jolsa@redhat.com>
To:     Raghavendra Rao Ananta <rananta@codeaurora.org>
Cc:     peterz@infradead.org, mingo@redhat.com, acme@kernel.org,
        alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com, namhyung@kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, psodagud@codeaurora.org,
        tsoni@codeaurora.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] perf: Add support for creating offline events
Message-ID: <20180212210442.GA32093@krava>
References: <1518217620-28458-1-git-send-email-rananta@codeaurora.org>
 <20180212094357.GD5821@krava>
 <53408020-8638-4947-90f6-87dbc4c2c4e5@codeaurora.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <53408020-8638-4947-90f6-87dbc4c2c4e5@codeaurora.org>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.1 (2017-09-22)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 09:42:05AM -0800, Raghavendra Rao Ananta wrote:
> Hi Jiri,
> 
> Thank you for the response.
> 
> Does perf tool has its own check to see if the CPU was offline during the
> lifetime of an event? If so, it might ignore these type of events.

nope, we don't check on that

> 
> Initially, I tested the same using perf tool and found similar results.
> Then I debugged further and found that the perf core was actually sending
> data to the userspace (copy_to_user()) and the corresponding count for the
> data. Hence, I tested this further by writing my own userspace application,
> and I was able to read the count through this,
> even when the CPU was made offline and back online.
> 
> Do you think we also have to modify the perf tool accordingly?

hum, I wonder what's wrong.. will check

jirka