From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.2 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F1FA3C43331 for ; Fri, 27 Mar 2020 10:08:41 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists.ozlabs.org (lists.ozlabs.org [203.11.71.2]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5A4F7206F8 for ; Fri, 27 Mar 2020 10:08:41 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 5A4F7206F8 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.ibm.com Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=linuxppc-dev-bounces+linuxppc-dev=archiver.kernel.org@lists.ozlabs.org Received: from lists.ozlabs.org (lists.ozlabs.org [IPv6:2401:3900:2:1::3]) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 48pcxy2XddzDrBy for ; Fri, 27 Mar 2020 21:08:38 +1100 (AEDT) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; spf=pass (sender SPF authorized) smtp.mailfrom=linux.ibm.com (client-ip=148.163.158.5; helo=mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com; envelope-from=kjain@linux.ibm.com; receiver=) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.ibm.com Received: from mx0a-001b2d01.pphosted.com (mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com [148.163.158.5]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 48pcvp5DhtzDr0L for ; Fri, 27 Mar 2020 21:06:46 +1100 (AEDT) Received: from pps.filterd (m0098420.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com (8.16.0.42/8.16.0.42) with SMTP id 02RA2fse179254; Fri, 27 Mar 2020 06:06:27 -0400 Received: from pps.reinject (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 301fcyg3mh-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Fri, 27 Mar 2020 06:06:27 -0400 Received: from m0098420.ppops.net (m0098420.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by pps.reinject (8.16.0.36/8.16.0.36) with SMTP id 02RA3Haw180880; Fri, 27 Mar 2020 06:06:26 -0400 Received: from ppma03wdc.us.ibm.com (ba.79.3fa9.ip4.static.sl-reverse.com [169.63.121.186]) by mx0b-001b2d01.pphosted.com with ESMTP id 301fcyg3ky-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Fri, 27 Mar 2020 06:06:26 -0400 Received: from pps.filterd (ppma03wdc.us.ibm.com [127.0.0.1]) by ppma03wdc.us.ibm.com (8.16.0.27/8.16.0.27) with SMTP id 02R9ufGQ027025; Fri, 27 Mar 2020 10:00:54 GMT Received: from b03cxnp07028.gho.boulder.ibm.com (b03cxnp07028.gho.boulder.ibm.com [9.17.130.15]) by ppma03wdc.us.ibm.com with ESMTP id 2ywawah9ur-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=NOT); Fri, 27 Mar 2020 10:00:54 +0000 Received: from b03ledav004.gho.boulder.ibm.com (b03ledav004.gho.boulder.ibm.com [9.17.130.235]) by b03cxnp07028.gho.boulder.ibm.com (8.14.9/8.14.9/NCO v10.0) with ESMTP id 02RA0rwr46793202 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Fri, 27 Mar 2020 10:00:53 GMT Received: from b03ledav004.gho.boulder.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5A4E378066; Fri, 27 Mar 2020 10:00:53 +0000 (GMT) Received: from b03ledav004.gho.boulder.ibm.com (unknown [127.0.0.1]) by IMSVA (Postfix) with ESMTP id 96D137805E; Fri, 27 Mar 2020 10:00:44 +0000 (GMT) Received: from localhost.localdomain (unknown [9.79.180.159]) by b03ledav004.gho.boulder.ibm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP; Fri, 27 Mar 2020 10:00:44 +0000 (GMT) Subject: Re: [PATCH v6 09/11] perf/tools: Enhance JSON/metric infrastructure to handle "?" To: Jiri Olsa References: <20200320125406.30995-1-kjain@linux.ibm.com> <20200320125406.30995-10-kjain@linux.ibm.com> <20200324131141.GV1534489@krava> From: kajoljain Message-ID: <5f0c693a-42e4-0ff8-7fe5-8a35f5efe64a@linux.ibm.com> Date: Fri, 27 Mar 2020 15:30:42 +0530 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20200324131141.GV1534489@krava> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-TM-AS-GCONF: 00 X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10434:6.0.138, 18.0.645 definitions=2020-03-27_02:2020-03-26, 2020-03-27 signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=outbound_notspam policy=outbound score=0 lowpriorityscore=0 clxscore=1015 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 suspectscore=0 adultscore=0 mlxscore=0 impostorscore=0 phishscore=0 mlxlogscore=999 malwarescore=0 priorityscore=1501 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2003020000 definitions=main-2003270087 X-BeenThere: linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Linux on PowerPC Developers Mail List List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: mark.rutland@arm.com, maddy@linux.vnet.ibm.com, peterz@infradead.org, yao.jin@linux.intel.com, mingo@kernel.org, kan.liang@linux.intel.com, ak@linux.intel.com, alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com, anju@linux.vnet.ibm.com, mamatha4@linux.vnet.ibm.com, sukadev@linux.vnet.ibm.com, ravi.bangoria@linux.ibm.com, acme@kernel.org, jmario@redhat.com, namhyung@kernel.org, tglx@linutronix.de, mpetlan@redhat.com, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org, jolsa@kernel.org, linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org Errors-To: linuxppc-dev-bounces+linuxppc-dev=archiver.kernel.org@lists.ozlabs.org Sender: "Linuxppc-dev" On 3/24/20 6:41 PM, Jiri Olsa wrote: > On Fri, Mar 20, 2020 at 06:24:04PM +0530, Kajol Jain wrote: >> Patch enhances current metric infrastructure to handle "?" in the metric >> expression. The "?" can be use for parameters whose value not known while >> creating metric events and which can be replace later at runtime to >> the proper value. It also add flexibility to create multiple events out >> of single metric event added in json file. >> >> Patch adds function 'arch_get_runtimeparam' which is a arch specific >> function, returns the count of metric events need to be created. >> By default it return 1. >> >> This infrastructure needed for hv_24x7 socket/chip level events. >> "hv_24x7" chip level events needs specific chip-id to which the >> data is requested. Function 'arch_get_runtimeparam' implemented >> in header.c which extract number of sockets from sysfs file >> "sockets" under "/sys/devices/hv_24x7/interface/". >> >> >> With this patch basically we are trying to create as many metric events >> as define by runtime_param. >> >> For that one loop is added in function 'metricgroup__add_metric', >> which create multiple events at run time depend on return value of >> 'arch_get_runtimeparam' and merge that event in 'group_list'. >> >> To achieve that we are actually passing this parameter value as part of >> `expr__find_other` function and changing "?" present in metric expression >> with this value. >> >> As in our json file, there gonna be single metric event, and out of >> which we are creating multiple events, I am also merging this value >> to the original metric name to specify parameter value. >> >> For example, >> command:# ./perf stat -M PowerBUS_Frequency -C 0 -I 1000 >> # time counts unit events >> 1.000101867 9,356,933 hv_24x7/pm_pb_cyc,chip=0/ # 2.3 GHz PowerBUS_Frequency_0 >> 1.000101867 9,366,134 hv_24x7/pm_pb_cyc,chip=1/ # 2.3 GHz PowerBUS_Frequency_1 >> 2.000314878 9,365,868 hv_24x7/pm_pb_cyc,chip=0/ # 2.3 GHz PowerBUS_Frequency_0 >> 2.000314878 9,366,092 hv_24x7/pm_pb_cyc,chip=1/ # 2.3 GHz PowerBUS_Frequency_1 >> >> So, here _0 and _1 after PowerBUS_Frequency specify parameter value. >> >> As after adding this to group_list, again we call expr__parse >> in 'generic_metric' function present in util/stat-display.c. >> By this time again we need to pass this parameter value. So, now to get this value >> actually I am trying to extract it from metric name itself. Because >> otherwise it gonna point to last updated value present in runtime_param. >> And gonna match for that value only. > > so why can't we pass that param as integer value through the metric objects? > > it get's created in metricgroup__add_metric_param: > - as struct egroup *eg > - we can add egroup::param and store the param value there > > then in metricgroup__setup_events it moves to: > - struct metric_expr *expr > - we can add metric_expr::param to keep the param > > then in perf_stat__print_shadow_stats there's: > - struct metric_expr *mexp loop > - calling generic_metric metric - we could call it with mexp::param > - and pass the param to expr__parse > Hi jiri, Thanks for the suggestion, Yes it make more sense to use like that. Will update. Thanks, Kajol > jirka >