From 75c9f3284a7ff957829f44baace82406a6354ceb Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Peter Zijlstra Date: Fri, 29 Jan 2010 09:04:26 +0100 Subject: [PATCH] perf_events: Fix sample_period transfer on inherit One problem with frequency driven counters is that we cannot predict the rate at which they trigger, therefore we have to start them at period=1, this causes a ramp up effect. However, if we fail to propagate the stable state on fork each new child will have to ramp up again. This can lead to significant artifacts in sample data. Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra Cc: eranian@google.com Cc: Mike Galbraith Cc: Paul Mackerras Cc: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo Cc: Frederic Weisbecker LKML-Reference: <1264752266.4283.2121.camel@laptop> Signed-off-by: Ingo Molnar --- kernel/perf_event.c | 11 +++++++++-- 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/kernel/perf_event.c b/kernel/perf_event.c index 251fb9552492..53dc2a362111 100644 --- a/kernel/perf_event.c +++ b/kernel/perf_event.c @@ -5002,8 +5002,15 @@ inherit_event(struct perf_event *parent_event, else child_event->state = PERF_EVENT_STATE_OFF; - if (parent_event->attr.freq) - child_event->hw.sample_period = parent_event->hw.sample_period; + if (parent_event->attr.freq) { + u64 sample_period = parent_event->hw.sample_period; + struct hw_perf_event *hwc = &child_event->hw; + + hwc->sample_period = sample_period; + hwc->last_period = sample_period; + + atomic64_set(&hwc->period_left, sample_period); + } child_event->overflow_handler = parent_event->overflow_handler;