[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <6074e252-6e18-bb01-4de1-023bd7e82f03@synopsys.com>
Date: Fri, 26 Aug 2016 10:30:24 -0700
From: Vineet Gupta <Vineet.Gupta1@...opsys.com>
To: Alexey Brodkin <Alexey.Brodkin@...opsys.com>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
CC: "linux-snps-arc@...ts.infradead.org"
<linux-snps-arc@...ts.infradead.org>,
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...hat.com>,
"stable@...r.kernel.org" <stable@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] arc: perf: Enable generic "cache-references" and
"cache-misses" events
On 08/25/2016 04:49 AM, Alexey Brodkin wrote:
> ...
> [PERF_COUNT_ARC_EDTLB] = "edtlb", /* D-TLB Miss */
> [PERF_COUNT_ARC_EITLB] = "eitlb", /* I-TLB Miss */
> +
> + [PERF_COUNT_HW_CACHE_REFERENCES] = "imemrdc", /* Instr: mem read cached */
> + [PERF_COUNT_HW_CACHE_MISSES] = "dclm", /* D-cache Load Miss */
I think this is duplicating a mistake we already have. I vaguely remember when
doing some hackbench profiling last year with range based profiling confined to
memset routine and saw that L1-dcache-misses was counting zero. This is because it
only counts LD misses while memset only does ST.
Performance counter stats for '/sbin/hackbench':
0 L1-dcache-misses
0 L1-dcache-load-misses
1846082 L1-dcache-store-misses
@PeterZ do you concur that is wrong and we ought to setup 2 counters to do this
correctly ?
-Vineet
Powered by blists - more mailing lists