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 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BCEB0C433F5 for ; Wed, 5 Jan 2022 17:00:17 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S242094AbiAERAN (ORCPT ); Wed, 5 Jan 2022 12:00:13 -0500 Received: from foss.arm.com ([217.140.110.172]:45960 "EHLO foss.arm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S242066AbiAERAD (ORCPT ); Wed, 5 Jan 2022 12:00:03 -0500 Received: from usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (unknown [10.121.207.14]) by usa-sjc-mx-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6CB6311D4; Wed, 5 Jan 2022 09:00:03 -0800 (PST) Received: from [10.57.37.41] (unknown [10.57.37.41]) by usa-sjc-imap-foss1.foss.arm.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 9FBF33F774; Wed, 5 Jan 2022 09:00:00 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <6ba550d1-61bc-e229-2a64-331cfa59c388@arm.com> Date: Wed, 5 Jan 2022 16:58:42 +0000 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.4.0 Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 1/1] perf arm64: Implement --topdown with metrics Content-Language: en-US To: John Garry , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org" , "acme@kernel.org" , Andi Kleen Cc: Will Deacon , Mathieu Poirier , Leo Yan , Mark Rutland , Alexander Shishkin , Jiri Olsa , Namhyung Kim , "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" References: <4c375d34-bf20-496d-22fc-aed8597126e2@huawei.com> <20211214184240.24215-1-andrew.kilroy@arm.com> <20211214184240.24215-2-andrew.kilroy@arm.com> <48437bee-9c39-38ba-e990-ba9a6a5378b4@huawei.com> From: Andrew Kilroy In-Reply-To: <48437bee-9c39-38ba-e990-ba9a6a5378b4@huawei.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 17/12/2021 10:19, John Garry wrote: > > And there is no colouring for results which are above/below standard > thresholds (see stat-shadow.c:get_radio_color()). > > My impression is that we're not plugging the results from > metricgroup__parse_groups_to_evlist() into the --topdown print > functionality properly. > The --topdown kernel event colouring is dictated by a large if-else statement in stat-shadow.c:perf_stat__print_shadow_stats. There are branches depending on what is returned by perf_stat_evsel__is() for example } else if (perf_stat_evsel__is(evsel, TOPDOWN_FETCH_BUBBLES)) { double fe_bound = td_fe_bound(cpu, st, &rsd); if (fe_bound > 0.2) color = PERF_COLOR_RED; print_metric(config, ctxp, color, "%8.1f%%", "frontend bound", fe_bound * 100.); } else if (perf_stat_evsel__is(evsel, TOPDOWN_SLOTS_RETIRED)) { Because the patches are enabling metrics (equivalent of the -M 'somemetricname' option), the perf_stat__print_shadow_stats function always makes calls to generic_metric(), where colours are never picked. Seeing thresholds like: retiring > 0.7 fe_bound > 0.2 be_bound > 0.2 bad_spec > 0.1 I'm not sure about adding the colouring really. Are these thresholds x86 specific? > Thanks, > John Andrew