[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1238697121.3099.54.camel@ht.satnam>
Date: Fri, 03 Apr 2009 00:02:01 +0530
From: Jaswinder Singh Rajput <jaswinder@...nel.org>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
Cc: mingo@...hat.com, hpa@...or.com, paulus@...ba.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl,
tglx@...utronix.de, cjashfor@...ux.vnet.ibm.com,
linux-tip-commits@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [tip:perfcounters/core] perf_counter: kerneltop: update to new
ABI
On Thu, 2009-04-02 at 23:52 +0530, Jaswinder Singh Rajput wrote:
> On Thu, 2009-04-02 at 20:11 +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > * Jaswinder Singh Rajput <jaswinder@...nel.org> wrote:
> >
> > > On Thu, 2009-04-02 at 19:05 +0530, Jaswinder Singh Rajput wrote:
> > > > On Thu, 2009-04-02 at 12:03 +0000, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > > > > Commit-ID: 373b153677f26a263ef297d77a5e045a31f6486c
> > > > > Gitweb: http://git.kernel.org/tip/373b153677f26a263ef297d77a5e045a31f6486c
> > > > > Author: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
> > > > > AuthorDate: Thu, 2 Apr 2009 11:12:02 +0200
> > > > > Committer: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
> > > > > CommitDate: Thu, 2 Apr 2009 13:53:00 +0200
> > > > >
> > > > > perf_counter: kerneltop: update to new ABI
> > > > >
> > > > > Update to reflect the new record_type ABI changes.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > perfstat is still having many issues:
> > > >
> > > > 1. 0:6: bus-cycles is not valid for AMD, so it fails
> > > >
> > > > 2. ./perfstat -e 0:1,0:2,0:3,0:4,0:5,0:6 ls
> > > > can be replaced by ./perfstat -e 0:* ls
> > > >
> > > > 3. Similarly ./perfstat -e 1:1,1:2,1:3,1:4,1:5,1:6 ls
> > > > can be replaced by ./perfstat -e 1:* ls
> > > >
> > > > 4. All events can be replaced by ./perfstat -e * ls
> > > >
> > >
> > > 5. This command is invalid:
> > > Sample output:
> > >
> > > $ ./perfstat -e 1 -e 3 -e 5 ls -lR /usr/include/ >/dev/null
> >
> > yes, this should be fixed in perfstat: '-e 1' should be accepted as
> > '-e 0:1'. Patches welcome.
> >
>
Better I will show in pictorial way to avoid any confusion:
> if you treat '-e 1' as 'e 0:1' then how you will treat '-e 1:1' ?
>
'-e 1' ---> '-e 0:1'
? ---> '-e 1:1'
> I think 'e 1:*' is better option to select all software events and '-e
> 0:*' for all hardware events.
>
'-e 0:*' ---> select all hardware events.
'-e 1:*' ---> select all software events.
> Or '-e 1' will treat as both '-e 0:1,1:1'
>
'-e 1' ---> '-e 0:1,1:0'
--
JSR
--
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