search for: perfc

Hi All I want to use software counters available via "xenperf". However I get this error "Error getting number of perf counters: 38 (Function not implemented)". Am I missing something? Some configuration or option which needs to be turned on before I can use these counters. Any help would be much appreciated. I am using Xen 3.1.0 x86_64 -- Jyotirmaya Tripathi Virginia Tech

...================================= --- 2007-03-19.orig/xen/arch/ia64/asm-offsets.c 2007-02-12 14:00:54.000000000 +0100 +++ 2007-03-19/xen/arch/ia64/asm-offsets.c 2007-03-27 16:35:08.000000000 +0200 @@ -223,10 +223,11 @@ void foo(void) #ifdef PERF_COUNTERS BLANK(); - DEFINE(RECOVER_TO_PAGE_FAULT_PERFC_OFS, offsetof (struct perfcounter, recover_to_page_fault)); - DEFINE(RECOVER_TO_BREAK_FAULT_PERFC_OFS, offsetof (struct perfcounter, recover_to_break_fault)); - DEFINE(FAST_HYPERPRIVOP_PERFC_OFS, offsetof (struct perfcounter, fast_hyperprivop)); - DEFINE(FAST_REFLECT_PERFC_OFS, offsetof (struct per...

In order to be meaningful and usable together with other measuring methods, their use in my opinion should impose as little overhead as possible. With that, I wonder why per-cpu counters use atomic operations. Thanks, Jan _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xensource.com http://lists.xensource.com/xen-devel

...9-07-10.orig/xen/arch/ia64/xen/privop_stat.c 2009-07-03 10:20:56.000000000 +0200 +++ 2009-07-10/xen/arch/ia64/xen/privop_stat.c 2009-07-15 10:00:01.000000000 +0200 @@ -65,7 +65,7 @@ void gather_privop_addrs(void) { unsigned int cpu; - for_each_cpu ( cpu ) { + for_each_possible_cpu ( cpu ) { perfc_t *perfcounters = per_cpu(perfcounters, cpu); struct privop_addr_count *s = per_cpu(privop_addr_counter, cpu); int i, j; @@ -92,7 +92,7 @@ void reset_privop_addrs(void) { unsigned int cpu; - for_each_cpu ( cpu ) { + for_each_possible_cpu ( cpu ) { struct privop_addr_count *v = per_cpu...

My recent interest in the TPR-write problem has got me thinking about if there is any other optimisation that could be done for windows, especially as a few people have reported issues with more than a few processors, and they say they are already running 2K3sp2 which should have TPR optimisation in it already. Is there any facility currently for profiling the frequency of vmexit''s to

...if ( xc_mode == XC_DEFAULT ) xc_mode = XC_SERIAL; diff -Nru a/xen/Rules.mk b/xen/Rules.mk --- a/xen/Rules.mk Tue Nov 30 23:25:07 2004 +++ b/xen/Rules.mk Tue Nov 30 23:25:07 2004 @@ -1,6 +1,6 @@ -verbose ?= n -debug ?= n +verbose ?= y +debug ?= y debugger ?= n perfc ?= n trace ?= n ------------------------------------------------------- SF email is sponsored by - The IT Product Guide Read honest & candid reviews on hundreds of IT Products from real users. Discover which products truly live up to the hype. Start reading now. http://productgu...

...FSET(UREGS_sp, struct cpu_user_regs, sp); diff --git a/xen/arch/x86/x86_64/asm-offsets.c b/xen/arch/x86/x86_64/asm-offsets.c index b6d1919..6dc832c 100644 --- a/xen/arch/x86/x86_64/asm-offsets.c +++ b/xen/arch/x86/x86_64/asm-offsets.c @@ -8,6 +8,7 @@ #include <xen/config.h> #include <xen/perfc.h> #include <xen/sched.h> +#include <xen/bitops.h> #include <compat/xen.h> #include <asm/fixmap.h> #include <asm/hardirq.h> @@ -20,13 +21,6 @@ #define OFFSET(_sym, _str, _mem) \ DEFINE(_sym, offsetof(_str, _mem)); -/* base-2 logarithm */ -#define __L2(_x...

...* write permission removal * write emulation If any above two operations are observed within the race window, it indicates possiblity that previous walk result may be inaccurate and re-check is requried. If mismatch, simply return to trigger another fault. I made some experiment to sample perfc count for kernel compile: <64bit guest> 3.7% of gwalks are re-checked For re-check, 68% comes from write permission removal <32bit pae guest> 7.2% of gwalks are re-checked For re-check, 54.9% comes from write permission removal Actually previous fast emulation optimization already skip...

...return 1; } Index: 2006-10-04/xen/arch/x86/irq.c =================================================================== --- 2006-10-04.orig/xen/arch/x86/irq.c 2006-10-04 08:49:29.000000000 +0200 +++ 2006-10-04/xen/arch/x86/irq.c 2006-10-04 15:11:03.000000000 +0200 @@ -13,6 +13,7 @@ #include <xen/perfc.h> #include <xen/sched.h> #include <xen/keyhandler.h> +#include <xen/compat.h> #include <asm/current.h> #include <asm/smpboot.h> @@ -332,7 +333,7 @@ int pirq_guest_unmask(struct domain *d) irq < NR_IRQS; irq = find_next_bit(d->pirq_...

...04 K A Fraser + * Copyright (c) 2006 IBM Ryan Harper <ryanh@us.ibm.com> * * This program is free software; you can redistribute it and/or modify * it under the terms of the GNU General Public License as published by @@ -34,6 +35,8 @@ #include <xen/keyhandler.h> #include <xen/perfc.h> #include <asm/page.h> +#include <asm/numa.h> +#include <asm/topology.h> /* * Comma-separated list of hexadecimal page numbers containing bad bytes. @@ -247,22 +250,23 @@ unsigned long alloc_boot_pages(unsigned #define pfn_dom_zone_type(_pfn)...

Hello, I''m trying to get PDB working in accordance with the instructions at http://www.cl.cam.ac.uk/~sos22/replay.bk/docs/misc/XenDebugger-HOWTO and a message from this list: http://lists.xensource.com/archives/html/xen-devel/2004-08/msg00017.html When I try to build pdb I first get errors because the Makefile is configured to treat warnings as errors, and there are some warnings.

...diff -r 895d873a00b4 -r fa213888aa93 xen/common/Makefile --- a/xen/common/Makefile Tue Jan 16 10:02:50 2007 +0000 +++ b/xen/common/Makefile Tue Jan 16 14:17:36 2007 -0800 @@ -28,6 +28,7 @@ obj-y += version.o obj-y += version.o obj-y += vsprintf.o obj-y += xmalloc.o +obj-y += rcupdate.o obj-$(perfc) += perfc.o obj-$(crash_debug) += gdbstub.o diff -r 895d873a00b4 -r fa213888aa93 xen/common/rcupdate.c --- /dev/null Thu Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 +0000 +++ b/xen/common/rcupdate.c Tue Jan 16 14:17:36 2007 -0800 @@ -0,0 +1,381 @@ +/* + * Read-Copy Update mechanism for mutual exclusion + * + * Thi...

...diff -r 895d873a00b4 -r fa213888aa93 xen/common/Makefile --- a/xen/common/Makefile Tue Jan 16 10:02:50 2007 +0000 +++ b/xen/common/Makefile Tue Jan 16 14:17:36 2007 -0800 @@ -28,6 +28,7 @@ obj-y += version.o obj-y += version.o obj-y += vsprintf.o obj-y += xmalloc.o +obj-y += rcupdate.o obj-$(perfc) += perfc.o obj-$(crash_debug) += gdbstub.o diff -r 895d873a00b4 -r fa213888aa93 xen/common/rcupdate.c --- /dev/null Thu Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 +0000 +++ b/xen/common/rcupdate.c Tue Jan 16 14:17:36 2007 -0800 @@ -0,0 +1,381 @@ +/* + * Read-Copy Update mechanism for mutual exclusion + * + * Thi...

Linux 3.11 added respective support, so I think we should follow suit. 1: xen: add LZ4 decompression support 2: libxc: add LZ4 decompression support Signed-off-by: Jan Beulich <jbeulich@suse.com>

This round implements all of the review comments from V2 and all patches are now acked. Unless there are any objections I intend to apply later this morning. Ian.

Hello everyone, this is the fourth version of the patch series that introduces ARMv7 with virtualization extensions support in Xen. The series allows Xen and Dom0 to boot on a Cortex-A15 based Versatile Express simulator. See the following announce email for more informations about what we are trying to achieve, as well as the original git history: See

Hello everyone, this is the very first version of the patch series that introduces ARMv7 with virtualization extensions support in Xen. The series allows Xen and Dom0 to boot on a Cortex-A15 based Versatile Express simulator. See the following announce email for more informations about what we are trying to achieve, as well as the original git history: See