Hi!
> > I agree this needs to be tunable (and with the other suggestions). But
> > this is actually not the most important tunable: the detection
> > threshold (rh_attr.sample_period) should be way more important.
> >
> > And yes, this will all need to be tunable, somehow. But lets verify
> > tha
Hi!
> > I agree this needs to be tunable (and with the other suggestions). But
> > this is actually not the most important tunable: the detection
> > threshold (rh_attr.sample_period) should be way more important.
>
> So being totally ignorant of the detail of how rowhammer abuses the DDR
> thing
On Fri, Oct 28, 2016 at 11:35:47AM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> * Vegard Nossum wrote:
>
> > Would it make sense to sample the counter on context switch, do some
> > accounting on a per-task cache miss counter, and slow down just the
> > single task(s) with a too high cache miss rate? That way
On 28 October 2016 at 11:35, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> * Vegard Nossum wrote:
>
>> Would it make sense to sample the counter on context switch, do some
>> accounting on a per-task cache miss counter, and slow down just the
>> single task(s) with a too high cache miss rate? That way there's no
>> glo
* Vegard Nossum wrote:
> Would it make sense to sample the counter on context switch, do some
> accounting on a per-task cache miss counter, and slow down just the
> single task(s) with a too high cache miss rate? That way there's no
> global slowdown (which I assume would be the case here). The
On 28 October 2016 at 11:04, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 28, 2016 at 10:50:39AM +0200, Pavel Machek wrote:
>> On Fri 2016-10-28 09:07:01, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>> >
>> > * Pavel Machek wrote:
>> >
>> > > +static void rh_overflow(struct perf_event *event, struct
>> > > perf_sample_data *data
On Fri, Oct 28, 2016 at 10:50:39AM +0200, Pavel Machek wrote:
> On Fri 2016-10-28 09:07:01, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> >
> > * Pavel Machek wrote:
> >
> > > +static void rh_overflow(struct perf_event *event, struct
> > > perf_sample_data *data, struct pt_regs *regs)
> > > +{
> > > + u64 *ts = this_cp
* Pavel Machek wrote:
> On Fri 2016-10-28 09:07:01, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> >
> > * Pavel Machek wrote:
> >
> > > +static void rh_overflow(struct perf_event *event, struct
> > > perf_sample_data *data, struct pt_regs *regs)
> > > +{
> > > + u64 *ts = this_cpu_ptr(&rh_timestamp); /* this is NMI
On Fri 2016-10-28 09:07:01, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> * Pavel Machek wrote:
>
> > +static void rh_overflow(struct perf_event *event, struct perf_sample_data
> > *data, struct pt_regs *regs)
> > +{
> > + u64 *ts = this_cpu_ptr(&rh_timestamp); /* this is NMI context */
> > + u64 now = ktime_get_
* Pavel Machek wrote:
> +static void rh_overflow(struct perf_event *event, struct perf_sample_data
> *data, struct pt_regs *regs)
> +{
> + u64 *ts = this_cpu_ptr(&rh_timestamp); /* this is NMI context */
> + u64 now = ktime_get_mono_fast_ns();
> + s64 delta = now - *ts;
> +
> +
10 matches
Mail list logo
