linux-kernel - Re: perf: documentation for cycles_no

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Mon, 8 Jan 2018 22:18:08 +0100 (CET)
From:   Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@...6.fr>
To:     Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
cc:     Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
        Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>,
        Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com>,
        Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: perf: documentation for cycles_no_execute event



On Mon, 8 Jan 2018, Andi Kleen wrote:

> > > Many of the x86 pipeline.json files have the brief description "Total
> > > execution stalls" for both CYCLE_ACTIVITY.CYCLES_NO_EXECUTE and
> > > CYCLE_ACTIVITY.STALLS_TOTAL.  Should the case for
> > > CYCLE_ACTIVITY.CYCLES_NO_EXECUTE have a brief description that mentions
> > > cycles?  Some of the files do have a public description that mentions
> > > cycles, eg broadwellde/pipeline.json has "Counts number of cycles nothing
> > > is executed on any execution port.", but others (eg ivytown/pipeline.json)
> > > just have "Total execution stalls." twice.  Maybe "Cycles where nothing is
> > > executed" would be ok for CYCLE_ACTIVITY.CYCLES_NO_EXECUTE?
>
> Yes it's all in cycles
>
> Will clarify in a future event list update.

Thanks.

julia