[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20200217144505.GC19953@kernel.org>
Date: Mon, 17 Feb 2020 11:45:05 -0300
From: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <arnaldo.melo@...il.com>
To: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>
Cc: Jin Yao <yao.jin@...ux.intel.com>, jolsa@...nel.org,
peterz@...radead.org, mingo@...hat.com,
alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com, Linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
ak@...ux.intel.com, kan.liang@...el.com, yao.jin@...el.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] perf stat: Show percore counts in per CPU output
Em Sun, Feb 16, 2020 at 11:54:07PM +0100, Jiri Olsa escreveu:
> On Fri, Feb 14, 2020 at 04:04:52PM +0800, Jin Yao wrote:
>
> SNIP
>
> > CPU1 1,009,312 cpu/event=cpu-cycles,percore/
> > CPU2 2,784,072 cpu/event=cpu-cycles,percore/
> > CPU3 2,427,922 cpu/event=cpu-cycles,percore/
> > CPU4 2,752,148 cpu/event=cpu-cycles,percore/
> > CPU6 2,784,072 cpu/event=cpu-cycles,percore/
> > CPU7 2,427,922 cpu/event=cpu-cycles,percore/
> >
> > 1.001416041 seconds time elapsed
> >
> > v4:
> > ---
> > Ravi Bangoria reports an issue in v3. Once we offline a CPU,
> > the output is not correct. The issue is we should use the cpu
> > idx in print_percore_thread rather than using the cpu value.
>
> Acked-by: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...nel.org>
Applied to perf/core
- Arnaldo
> btw, there's slight misalignment in -I output, but not due
> to your change, it's there for some time now, and probably
> in other agregation outputs as well:
>
>
> $ sudo ./perf stat -e cpu/event=cpu-cycles/ -a -A -I 1000
> # time CPU counts unit events
> 1.000224464 CPU0 7,251,151 cpu/event=cpu-cycles/
> 1.000224464 CPU1 21,614,946 cpu/event=cpu-cycles/
> 1.000224464 CPU2 30,812,097 cpu/event=cpu-cycles/
>
> should be (extra space after CPUX):
>
> 1.000224464 CPU2 30,812,097 cpu/event=cpu-cycles/
>
> I'll put it on my TODO, but if you're welcome to check on it ;-)
>
> thanks,
> jirka
>
--
- Arnaldo
Powered by blists - more mailing lists