[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20160322075735.GA4473@krava.brq.redhat.com>
Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2016 08:57:35 +0100
From: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>
To: Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
Cc: acme@...nel.org, jolsa@...nel.org, mingo@...nel.org,
peterz@...radead.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] perf, tools: Document event specifications better
On Mon, Mar 21, 2016 at 08:56:32AM -0700, Andi Kleen wrote:
SNIP
> +EVENT GROUPS
> +------------
> +
> +Perf supports time based multiplexing of events, when the number of events
> +active exceeds the number of hardware performance counters. Multiplexing
> +can cause measurement errors when the workload changes its execution
> +profile.
> +
> +When metrics are computed using formulas from event counts, it is useful to
> +ensure some events are always measured together as a group to minimize multiplexing
> +errors. Event groups can be specified using { }.
> +
> + perf stat -e '{instructions,cycles}' ...
> +
> +When too many events are specified in the group perf the event will not
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
maybe: 'none of them' will be meassured.
> +be measured. The number of available performance counters depend on the CPU.
> +For example Intel Core CPUs have typically four generic performance counters
> +for the core, plus a number of specialized fixed counters.
> +
> +Events from multiple different PMUs cannot be mixed in a group.
hum, but we allow that right?
only when there's mixture of SW and HW events we move
it all silently under HW event context
jirka
Powered by blists - more mailing lists