From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752990AbdLHM3X (ORCPT ); Fri, 8 Dec 2017 07:29:23 -0500 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:39146 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752468AbdLHM3W (ORCPT ); Fri, 8 Dec 2017 07:29:22 -0500 Date: Fri, 8 Dec 2017 13:29:18 +0100 From: Jiri Olsa To: John Garry Cc: peterz@infradead.org, mingo@redhat.com, acme@kernel.org, alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com, namhyung@kernel.org, ak@linux.intel.com, wcohen@redhat.com, will.deacon@arm.com, ganapatrao.kulkarni@cavium.com, catalin.marinas@arm.com, mark.rutland@arm.com, xuwei5@hisilicon.com, linuxarm@huawei.com, zhangshaokun@hisilicon.com, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 2/5] perf jevents: add support for arch recommended events Message-ID: <20171208122918.GE2799@krava> References: <1512490399-94107-1-git-send-email-john.garry@huawei.com> <1512490399-94107-3-git-send-email-john.garry@huawei.com> <20171206133607.GA12508@krava> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.1 (2017-09-22) X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.5.16 (mx1.redhat.com [10.5.110.30]); Fri, 08 Dec 2017 12:29:22 +0000 (UTC) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Dec 06, 2017 at 03:20:14PM +0000, John Garry wrote: > On 06/12/2017 13:36, Jiri Olsa wrote: > > On Wed, Dec 06, 2017 at 12:13:16AM +0800, John Garry wrote: > > > For some architectures (like arm64), there are architecture- > > > defined recommended events. Vendors may not be obliged to > > > follow the recommendation and may implement their own pmu > > > event for a specific event code. > > > > > > This patch adds support for parsing events from arch-defined > > > recommended JSONs, and then fixing up vendor events when > > > they have implemented these events as recommended. > > > > in the previous patch you added the vendor support, so > > you have arch|vendor|platform key for the event list > > and perf have the most current/local event list > > > > why would you need to fix it? if there's new event list, > > the table gets updated, perf is rebuilt.. I'm clearly > > missing something ;-) > > The 2 patches are quite separate. In the first patch, I just added support > for the vendor subdirectory. > > So this patch is not related to rebuilding when adding a new event list or > dependency checking. > > Here we are trying to allow the vendor to just specify that an event is > supported as standard in their platform, without duplicating all the > standard event fields in their JSON. When processing the vendor JSONs, the > jevents tool can figure which events are standard and create the proper > event entries in the pmu events table, referencing the architecture JSON. I think we should keep this simple and mangle this with some pointer logic now you have arch/vendor/platform directory structure.. why don't you add events for every such directory? I understand there will be duplications, but we already have them for other archs and it's not big deal: [jolsa@krava perf]$ grep -r L2_RQSTS.DEMAND_DATA_RD_MISS pmu-events/arch/* pmu-events/arch/x86/broadwell/cache.json: "EventName": "L2_RQSTS.DEMAND_DATA_RD_MISS", pmu-events/arch/x86/haswell/cache.json: "EventName": "L2_RQSTS.DEMAND_DATA_RD_MISS", pmu-events/arch/x86/broadwellde/cache.json: "EventName": "L2_RQSTS.DEMAND_DATA_RD_MISS", pmu-events/arch/x86/haswellx/cache.json: "EventName": "L2_RQSTS.DEMAND_DATA_RD_MISS", pmu-events/arch/x86/skylake/cache.json: "EventName": "L2_RQSTS.DEMAND_DATA_RD_MISS", pmu-events/arch/x86/skylakex/cache.json: "EventName": "L2_RQSTS.DEMAND_DATA_RD_MISS", pmu-events/arch/x86/broadwellx/cache.json: "EventName": "L2_RQSTS.DEMAND_DATA_RD_MISS", thanks, jirka From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: jolsa@redhat.com (Jiri Olsa) Date: Fri, 8 Dec 2017 13:29:18 +0100 Subject: [RFC PATCH 2/5] perf jevents: add support for arch recommended events In-Reply-To: References: <1512490399-94107-1-git-send-email-john.garry@huawei.com> <1512490399-94107-3-git-send-email-john.garry@huawei.com> <20171206133607.GA12508@krava> Message-ID: <20171208122918.GE2799@krava> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Wed, Dec 06, 2017 at 03:20:14PM +0000, John Garry wrote: > On 06/12/2017 13:36, Jiri Olsa wrote: > > On Wed, Dec 06, 2017 at 12:13:16AM +0800, John Garry wrote: > > > For some architectures (like arm64), there are architecture- > > > defined recommended events. Vendors may not be obliged to > > > follow the recommendation and may implement their own pmu > > > event for a specific event code. > > > > > > This patch adds support for parsing events from arch-defined > > > recommended JSONs, and then fixing up vendor events when > > > they have implemented these events as recommended. > > > > in the previous patch you added the vendor support, so > > you have arch|vendor|platform key for the event list > > and perf have the most current/local event list > > > > why would you need to fix it? if there's new event list, > > the table gets updated, perf is rebuilt.. I'm clearly > > missing something ;-) > > The 2 patches are quite separate. In the first patch, I just added support > for the vendor subdirectory. > > So this patch is not related to rebuilding when adding a new event list or > dependency checking. > > Here we are trying to allow the vendor to just specify that an event is > supported as standard in their platform, without duplicating all the > standard event fields in their JSON. When processing the vendor JSONs, the > jevents tool can figure which events are standard and create the proper > event entries in the pmu events table, referencing the architecture JSON. I think we should keep this simple and mangle this with some pointer logic now you have arch/vendor/platform directory structure.. why don't you add events for every such directory? I understand there will be duplications, but we already have them for other archs and it's not big deal: [jolsa at krava perf]$ grep -r L2_RQSTS.DEMAND_DATA_RD_MISS pmu-events/arch/* pmu-events/arch/x86/broadwell/cache.json: "EventName": "L2_RQSTS.DEMAND_DATA_RD_MISS", pmu-events/arch/x86/haswell/cache.json: "EventName": "L2_RQSTS.DEMAND_DATA_RD_MISS", pmu-events/arch/x86/broadwellde/cache.json: "EventName": "L2_RQSTS.DEMAND_DATA_RD_MISS", pmu-events/arch/x86/haswellx/cache.json: "EventName": "L2_RQSTS.DEMAND_DATA_RD_MISS", pmu-events/arch/x86/skylake/cache.json: "EventName": "L2_RQSTS.DEMAND_DATA_RD_MISS", pmu-events/arch/x86/skylakex/cache.json: "EventName": "L2_RQSTS.DEMAND_DATA_RD_MISS", pmu-events/arch/x86/broadwellx/cache.json: "EventName": "L2_RQSTS.DEMAND_DATA_RD_MISS", thanks, jirka