[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <18758.18075.30744.666904@cargo.ozlabs.ibm.com>
Date: Mon, 15 Dec 2008 22:59:23 +1100
From: Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Stephane Eranian <eranian@...glemail.com>,
Eric Dumazet <dada1@...mosbay.com>,
Robert Richter <robert.richter@....com>,
Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>,
Peter Anvin <hpa@...or.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
perfctr-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: [patch] Performance Counters for Linux, v4
Ingo Molnar writes:
> For example, a full kernel build's statistics on a 16-way x86 box are:
>
> $ timec -e -5,-4,-3,1,2,3,5 make -j32 bzImage
>
> Performance counter stats for 'make':
>
> 142420.882 task clock ticks (millisecs)
>
> 9951033 pagefaults (events)
> 302628 context switches (events)
> 57810 CPU migrations (events)
> 208439082509 instructions (events)
> 657918810 cache references (events)
> 120243697 cache misses (events)
> 3134162468 branch misses (events)
Does this machine have sufficient hardware counters to count those
four hardware events at the same time? Or were those counters
timeshared onto 1 or 2 hardware counters? If it's the latter, are
those counts from half or a quarter of the total execution?
Paul.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists