linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 6/9] perf report: Support instruction latency

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CAM9d7ci1qQy+oeOvKJE4N8nZxm6h+=vBP_wp_WXOhPnUphpJ-Q@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Sat, 6 Feb 2021 17:09:33 +0900
From:   Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>
To:     "Liang, Kan" <kan.liang@...ux.intel.com>
Cc:     Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
        linux-kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Stephane Eranian <eranian@...gle.com>,
        Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>, Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>,
        Yao Jin <yao.jin@...ux.intel.com>, maddy@...ux.vnet.ibm.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 6/9] perf report: Support instruction latency

On Fri, Feb 5, 2021 at 11:38 PM Liang, Kan <kan.liang@...ux.intel.com> wrote:
>
> On 2/5/2021 6:08 AM, Namhyung Kim wrote:
> > On Wed, Feb 3, 2021 at 5:14 AM <kan.liang@...ux.intel.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> From: Kan Liang <kan.liang@...ux.intel.com>
> >>
> >> The instruction latency information can be recorded on some platforms,
> >> e.g., the Intel Sapphire Rapids server. With both memory latency
> >> (weight) and the new instruction latency information, users can easily
> >> locate the expensive load instructions, and also understand the time
> >> spent in different stages. The users can optimize their applications
> >> in different pipeline stages.
> >>
> >> The 'weight' field is shared among different architectures. Reusing the
> >> 'weight' field may impacts other architectures. Add a new field to store
> >> the instruction latency.
> >>
> >> Like the 'weight' support, introduce a 'ins_lat' for the global
> >> instruction latency, and a 'local_ins_lat' for the local instruction
> >> latency version.
> >
> > Could you please clarify the difference between the global latency
> > and the local latency?
> >
>
> The global means the total latency.
> The local means average latency, aka total / number of samples.

Thanks for the explanation, but I think it's confusing.
Why not call it just total_latency and avg_latency?

Thanks,
Namhyung