[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <aaab8c6a-a02a-f96b-ec43-e9694c8aad02@linux.ibm.com>
Date: Thu, 5 Mar 2020 10:36:39 +0530
From: Ravi Bangoria <ravi.bangoria@...ux.ibm.com>
To: Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
linuxppc-dev@...ts.ozlabs.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
eranian@...gle.com, mpe@...erman.id.au, paulus@...ba.org,
mingo@...hat.com, acme@...nel.org, mark.rutland@....com,
alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com, jolsa@...hat.com,
namhyung@...nel.org, adrian.hunter@...el.com,
kan.liang@...ux.intel.com, alexey.budankov@...ux.intel.com,
yao.jin@...ux.intel.com, robert.richter@....com,
kim.phillips@....com, maddy@...ux.ibm.com,
Ravi Bangoria <ravi.bangoria@...ux.ibm.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC 00/11] perf: Enhancing perf to export processor hazard
information
Hi Andi,
Sorry for being bit late.
On 3/3/20 7:03 AM, Andi Kleen wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 02, 2020 at 11:13:32AM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>> On Mon, Mar 02, 2020 at 10:53:44AM +0530, Ravi Bangoria wrote:
>>> Modern processors export such hazard data in Performance
>>> Monitoring Unit (PMU) registers. Ex, 'Sampled Instruction Event
>>> Register' on IBM PowerPC[1][2] and 'Instruction-Based Sampling' on
>>> AMD[3] provides similar information.
>>>
>>> Implementation detail:
>>>
>>> A new sample_type called PERF_SAMPLE_PIPELINE_HAZ is introduced.
>>> If it's set, kernel converts arch specific hazard information
>>> into generic format:
>>>
>>> struct perf_pipeline_haz_data {
>>> /* Instruction/Opcode type: Load, Store, Branch .... */
>>> __u8 itype;
>>> /* Instruction Cache source */
>>> __u8 icache;
>>> /* Instruction suffered hazard in pipeline stage */
>>> __u8 hazard_stage;
>>> /* Hazard reason */
>>> __u8 hazard_reason;
>>> /* Instruction suffered stall in pipeline stage */
>>> __u8 stall_stage;
>>> /* Stall reason */
>>> __u8 stall_reason;
>>> __u16 pad;
>>> };
>>
>> Kim, does this format indeed work for AMD IBS?
>
> Intel PEBS has a similar concept for annotation of memory accesses,
> which is already exported through perf_mem_data_src. This is essentially
> an extension. It would be better to have something unified here.
> Right now it seems to duplicate at least part of the PEBS facility.
IIUC there is a distinction from perf mem vs exposing the pipeline details.
perf-mem/perf_mem_data_src is more of memory accesses profiling. And proposal
here is to expose pipeline related details like stalls and latencies. Would
prefer/suggest not to extend the current structure further to capture pipeline
details.
Ravi
Powered by blists - more mailing lists