linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] perf vendor events: Add missing Neoverse V1 events

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <8800c180-ed40-1de2-82c6-b6077fbf0bfc@arm.com>
Date:   Mon, 5 Sep 2022 12:19:16 +0100
From:   Nick Forrington <nick.forrington@....com>
To:     Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>
Cc:     John Garry <john.garry@...wei.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-perf-users@...r.kernel.org, Will Deacon <will@...nel.org>,
        James Clark <james.clark@....com>,
        Mike Leach <mike.leach@...aro.org>,
        Leo Yan <leo.yan@...aro.org>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
        Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com>,
        Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...nel.org>,
        Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] perf vendor events: Add missing Neoverse V1 events


On 02/09/2022 20:25, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
> Em Fri, Sep 02, 2022 at 03:12:49PM +0100, Nick Forrington escreveu:
>> On 02/09/2022 09:04, John Garry wrote:
>>> On 01/09/2022 16:18, Nick Forrington wrote:
>>>> Based on updated data from:
>>>> https://github.com/ARM-software/data/blob/master/pmu/neoverse-v1.json
>>>>
>>>> which is based on PMU event descriptions from the Arm Neoverse V1
>>>> Technical Reference Manual.
>>>>
>>>> This adds the following missing events:
>>>> ASE_INST_SPEC
>>>> SVE_INST_SPEC
>>>> SVE_PRED_SPEC
>>>> SVE_PRED_EMPTY_SPEC
>>>> SVE_PRED_FULL_SPEC
>>>> SVE_PRED_PARTIAL_SPEC
>>>> SVE_LDFF_SPEC
>>>> SVE_LDFF_FAULT_SPEC
>>>> FP_SCALE_OPS_SPEC
>>>> FP_FIXED_OPS_SPEC
>>>>
>>>> It also moves REMOTE_ACCESS from other.json to memory.json.
>>> Any specific reason why? I see that neoverse n2 and a76-n1 still use
>>> "other" json for REMOTE_ACCESS. Nicer to be consistent.
>> Thanks John, I agree on consistency.
>>
>> I think memory is a better categorisation (for all CPUs), and this is
>> consistent with what I submitted for various Cortex CPUs a while back.
> Were those patches processed or is some still outstanding?

Those were processed.

(REMOTE_ACCESS appears in memory.json for the Cortex JSON files)

>   
>> I'd be happy to remove the REMOTE_ACCESS change here and update (or not)
>> REMOTE_ACCESS for Neoverse separately.
>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Nick Forrington<nick.forrington@....com>
>>>> ---
>>> Apart from above:
>>> Reviewed-by: John Garry <john.garry@...wei.com>
>> Thanks, Nick
> So, how should we proceed?
>
> - Arnaldo

I'll update this patch to remove the REMOTE_ACCESS change, and submit a 
separate patch to make REMOTE_ACCESS categorisation consistent across 
all CPUs.