Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
Date:   Fri, 24 Jul 2020 15:54:12 +0200
From:   Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To:     "Liang, Kan" <kan.liang@linux.intel.com>
Cc:     acme@redhat.com, mingo@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        jolsa@kernel.org, eranian@google.com,
        alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com, ak@linux.intel.com,
        like.xu@linux.intel.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH V7 07/14] perf/core: Add a new PERF_EV_CAP_COEXIST event
 capability
Message-ID: <20200724135412.GA10769@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
References: <20200723171117.9918-1-kan.liang@linux.intel.com>
 <20200723171117.9918-8-kan.liang@linux.intel.com>
 <20200724105543.GV119549@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
 <20200724114628.GJ43129@hirez.programming.kicks-ass.net>
 <0d33a25c-cfe4-af7f-c915-a98dba17b53b@linux.intel.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <0d33a25c-cfe4-af7f-c915-a98dba17b53b@linux.intel.com>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Fri, Jul 24, 2020 at 09:43:44AM -0400, Liang, Kan wrote:
> 
> 
> On 7/24/2020 7:46 AM, peterz@infradead.org wrote:
> > On Fri, Jul 24, 2020 at 12:55:43PM +0200, peterz@infradead.org wrote:
> > > > +	event_sched_out(event, cpuctx, ctx);
> > > > +	perf_event_set_state(event, PERF_EVENT_STATE_ERROR);
> > > > +}
> > > 
> > > Ah, so the problem here is that ERROR is actually recoverable using
> > > IOC_ENABLE. We don't want that either. Let me try and figure out of EXIT
> > > would work.
> > 
> > EXIT is difficult too.. Also, that COEXIST thing hurt my brian, can't we
> > do a simpler SIBLING thing that simply requires the event to be a group
> > sibling?
> > 
> > The consequence is that SLOTS must be the leader, is that really a
> > problem? You keep providing the {cycles, slots, metric-things} example,
> > but afaict {slots, metric-thing, cycles} should work just fine too.
> > PERF_SAMPLE_READ with PERF_FORMAT_GROUP doesn't need to the the leader.
> 
> I'm not sure I get your point.
> For the PERF_SAMPLE_READ with PERF_FORMAT_GROUP case, other events can be
> the leader, e.g., {cycles, slots, metric-things}:S.
> In this case, the SLOTS event is not a leader. I don't think we can assume
> that the SLOTS event must be the leader.

You can have a sibling event with SAMPLE_READ and FORMAT_GROUP just
fine. The sampling event doesn't need to be the leader.