[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20120928152911.GU16230@one.firstfloor.org>
Date: Fri, 28 Sep 2012 17:29:11 +0200
From: Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
To: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
Cc: Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
x86@...nel.org, eranian@...gle.com, acme@...hat.com,
Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>, Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 04/31] perf, core: Add generic intx/intx_checkpointed counter modifiers
On Fri, Sep 28, 2012 at 05:19:19PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Fri, 2012-09-28 at 16:53 +0200, Andi Kleen wrote:
> > If I moved this into sysfs this would imply that the perf stat -T
> > code would become Haswell specific. As far as I understand normally
> > you guys don't want things like that. Would everyone be ok with
> > having specific code there?
>
> Have a look at /sys/bus/event_source/devices/cpu/format/*, that's
> already very hardware specific.
>
> What I suggested is something like:
>
> PMU_FORMAT_ATTR(intx, "config:32");
> PMU_FORMAT_ATTR(intx_cp "config:33");
>
> For the HSW+ cpus. That should be enough for userspace to create such
> events.
Still would need new fields, but I presume that could be fit in.
perf stat -T uses these qualifiers and computes some derived
metrics. This would become HSW specific code which has to assume
HSW sysfs events. Is everyone ok with that?
I also still would like the :t, :c shortcuts, but those could be probably
just hardcoded.
-Andi
--
ak@...ux.intel.com -- Speaking for myself only.
--
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