Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932424AbWHWM3L (ORCPT ); Wed, 23 Aug 2006 08:29:11 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S932441AbWHWM3K (ORCPT ); Wed, 23 Aug 2006 08:29:10 -0400 Received: from mx1.suse.de ([195.135.220.2]:8577 "EHLO mx1.suse.de") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932424AbWHWM3J (ORCPT ); Wed, 23 Aug 2006 08:29:09 -0400 From: Andi Kleen To: eranian@hpl.hp.com Subject: Re: [PATCH 18/18] 2.6.17.9 perfmon2 patch for review: new x86_64 files Date: Wed, 23 Aug 2006 14:29:04 +0200 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.3 Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, discuss@x86-64.org References: <200608230806.k7N869KD000552@frankl.hpl.hp.com> <200608231322.44106.ak@suse.de> <20060823121434.GE697@frankl.hpl.hp.com> In-Reply-To: <20060823121434.GE697@frankl.hpl.hp.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200608231429.04413.ak@suse.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1774 Lines: 49 On Wednesday 23 August 2006 14:14, Stephane Eranian wrote: [adding discuss@x86-64.org so that possibly AMD people can comment] > On Wed, Aug 23, 2006 at 01:22:44PM +0200, Andi Kleen wrote: > > > > > I have a second thought on this. AMD has architected the performance counters. > > > > Quote: > > >> > > Implementations are not required to support the performance > > c o u n t e rs and the event-select registers, or the time-stamp > > counter. The presence of these features can be determined by > > << > > > At the end of this paragraph then mention using CPUID to determine > the presence of the counters. AFAIK, there is no feature bit > covering performance monitoring. Does that mean we are left > with having to check the family and model number just like on > Intel? Yes I puzzled over that too. Maybe they meant the MSR CPUID bits, but most likely it was a mistake by the tech writer. Yes I think you have to. Only checking vendor/family should be fine though -- i am not aware of performance counter variations between models. Perhaps add a force argument again that disables the family check too. > Ok, I think I understand now: > 1/ Bios and Kernel Developer Guide from Ahtlon64 and Opteron 64 is > what you are talking about with K7/K8 Well K8. K7 has a different one. But ok. I think you don't try to support K7 at all currently (it has the same register format as K8, but the list of counters is different) > 2/ AMD64 Architecture Programmer's Manual is the generic AMD64 description Yep -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/