[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20180108140008.GA17156@krava>
Date: Mon, 8 Jan 2018 15:00:08 +0100
From: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>
To: Julia Lawall <julia.lawall@...6.fr>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>,
Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com>,
Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
Subject: Re: perf: documentation for cycles_no_execute event
On Fri, Dec 29, 2017 at 11:58:42AM +0100, Julia Lawall wrote:
> Hello,
hi,
adding Andi in cc, he should be able to answer this
thanks,
jirka
>
> Many of the x86 pipeline.json files have the brief description "Total
> execution stalls" for both CYCLE_ACTIVITY.CYCLES_NO_EXECUTE and
> CYCLE_ACTIVITY.STALLS_TOTAL. Should the case for
> CYCLE_ACTIVITY.CYCLES_NO_EXECUTE have a brief description that mentions
> cycles? Some of the files do have a public description that mentions
> cycles, eg broadwellde/pipeline.json has "Counts number of cycles nothing
> is executed on any execution port.", but others (eg ivytown/pipeline.json)
> just have "Total execution stalls." twice. Maybe "Cycles where nothing is
> executed" would be ok for CYCLE_ACTIVITY.CYCLES_NO_EXECUTE?
>
> thanks,
> julia
Powered by blists - more mailing lists