From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752262AbbCWJpP (ORCPT ); Mon, 23 Mar 2015 05:45:15 -0400 Received: from mail-we0-f179.google.com ([74.125.82.179]:36753 "EHLO mail-we0-f179.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752105AbbCWJpL (ORCPT ); Mon, 23 Mar 2015 05:45:11 -0400 Date: Mon, 23 Mar 2015 10:45:07 +0100 From: Ingo Molnar To: Andi Kleen Cc: peterz@infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Andi Kleen Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] perf, x86: Add new cache events table for Haswell Message-ID: <20150323094506.GB24993@gmail.com> References: <1424225886-18652-1-git-send-email-andi@firstfloor.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1424225886-18652-1-git-send-email-andi@firstfloor.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org * Andi Kleen wrote: > From: Andi Kleen > > Haswell offcore events are quite different from Sandy Bridge. > Add a new table to handle Haswell properly. > > Note that the offcore bits listed in the SDM are not quite correct > (this is currently being fixed). An uptodate list of bits is > in the patch. > > The basic setup is similar to Sandy Bridge. The prefetch columns > have been removed, as prefetch counting is not very reliable > on Haswell. One L1 event that is not in the event list anymore > has been also removed. > > - data reads do not include code reads (comparable to earlier Sandy > Bridge tables) > - data counts include speculative execution (except L1 write, dtlb, bpu) > - remote node access includes both remote memory, remote cache, remote mmio. > - prefetches are not included in the counts for consistency > (different from Sandy Bridge, which includes prefetches in the remote node) > > The events with additional caveats have references to the specification update. > + [ C(RESULT_ACCESS) ] = 0x81d0, /* MEM_UOPS_RETIRED.ALL_LOADS, HSM30 */ > + [ C(RESULT_ACCESS) ] = 0x82d0, /* MEM_UOPS_RETIRED.ALL_STORES, HSM30 */ > + [ C(RESULT_ACCESS) ] = 0x81d0, /* MEM_UOPS_RETIRED.ALL_LOADS, HSM30 */ > + [ C(RESULT_ACCESS) ] = 0x82d0, /* MEM_UOPS_RETIRED.ALL_STORES, HSM30 */ So that 'HSM30' is code for the specification update? You'll need to properly describe HSM30 at least once instead of using obfuscation. Thanks, Ingo