[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20200712185523.GA147742@krava>
Date: Sun, 12 Jul 2020 20:55:23 +0200
From: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>
To: Kajol Jain <kjain@...ux.ibm.com>
Cc: acme@...nel.org, peterz@...radead.org, mingo@...hat.com,
mark.rutland@....com, alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com,
pc@...ibm.com, namhyung@...nel.org, ak@...ux.intel.com,
yao.jin@...ux.intel.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-perf-users@...r.kernel.org, irogers@...gle.com,
maddy@...ux.ibm.com, ravi.bangoria@...ux.ibm.com,
anju@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, kan.liang@...ux.intel.com,
nasastry@...ibm.com
Subject: Re: [RFC v2 3/5] perf jevents: Add support for parsing
perchip/percore events
On Tue, Jul 07, 2020 at 05:53:12PM +0530, Kajol Jain wrote:
> Added the "PerChip" field in enum so that perf knows they are
> per chip events.
>
> Added the "PerCore" field in enum so that perf knows they are
> per core events and add these fields to pmu_event structure.
>
> Similar to the way we had "PerPkg field
> to specify perpkg events.
>
> Signed-off-by: Kajol Jain <kjain@...ux.ibm.com>
> ---
> tools/perf/pmu-events/jevents.c | 8 +++++++-
> tools/perf/pmu-events/pmu-events.h | 4 +++-
> 2 files changed, 10 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/tools/perf/pmu-events/jevents.c b/tools/perf/pmu-events/jevents.c
> index b2f59f0af63d..1f65047db000 100644
> --- a/tools/perf/pmu-events/jevents.c
> +++ b/tools/perf/pmu-events/jevents.c
> @@ -54,13 +54,19 @@ int verbose;
> char *prog;
>
> enum aggr_mode_class {
> - PerPkg = 1
> + PerChip = 0,
is there a reason for the values? just wonder if it's wise to have PerChip == 0,
and why you would not continue with forward when PerPkg is 1
jirka
> + PerPkg = 1,
> + PerCore = 2
> };
>
SNIP
Powered by blists - more mailing lists