[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAP-5=fXxrNVfiCd6pVmM9BPErXcVU4PKgX8Fvbzq63H=xh=2Hw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 27 Jun 2020 16:25:54 -0700
From: Ian Rogers <irogers@...gle.com>
To: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>
Cc: Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>, Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...nel.org>,
lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>,
Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
Michael Petlan <mpetlan@...hat.com>,
Kajol Jain <kjain@...ux.ibm.com>,
John Garry <john.garry@...wei.com>,
"Paul A. Clarke" <pc@...ibm.com>,
Stephane Eranian <eranian@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC 00/10] perf tools: Add support to reuse metric
On Sat, Jun 27, 2020 at 5:48 AM Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
<acme@...nel.org> wrote:
>
> Em Fri, Jun 26, 2020 at 02:57:59PM -0700, Andi Kleen escreveu:
> > > The name could be a metric or an event, the logic for each is quite
> >
> > I would say collisions are unlikely. Event names follow quite structured
> > patterns.
>
> And when introducing a new metric the build process can detect that
> clash and fail.
>
> > > different. You could look up an event and when it fails assume it was
> > > a metric, but I like the simplicity of this approach.
>
> > I don't think it's simpler for the user.
>
> Agreed.
>
> > > Maybe this
> > > change could be adopted more widely with something like "perf stat -e
> > > metric:IPC -a -I 1000" rather than the current "perf stat -M IPC -a -I
> > > 1000".
> >
> > I thought about just adding metrics to -e, without metric: of course.
>
> Ditto.
Thanks, while we're thinking about this I'd like there to be support
for flags on metrics. Such as 'perf stat -M IPC:u ...' where the ':u'
is specifying user only as with events.
Fwiw, another point of pain is lining up events with cgroups. Being
able to have the cgroup be a flag on an event or metric would be nice.
Ian
> - Arnaldo
Powered by blists - more mailing lists