linux-kernel - Re: [External] : [RFC PATCH v2 1/6] perf vendor events arm64: Add topdown L1 metrics for neoverse-n2

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: <a37ca1e6-7d22-3c80-98be-0dec37d76c9b@linux.alibaba.com>
Date:   Tue, 22 Nov 2022 17:24:59 +0800
From:   Jing Zhang <renyu.zj@...ux.alibaba.com>
To:     John Garry <john.g.garry@...cle.com>,
        linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org,
        linux-perf-users@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...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>, Ian Rogers <irogers@...gle.com>
Cc:     Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
        Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>,
        Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
        Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com>,
        Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...nel.org>,
        Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>,
        Andrew Kilroy <andrew.kilroy@....com>,
        Shuai Xue <xueshuai@...ux.alibaba.com>,
        Zhuo Song <zhuo.song@...ux.alibaba.com>
Subject: Re: [External] : [RFC PATCH v2 1/6] perf vendor events arm64: Add
 topdown L1 metrics for neoverse-n2



在 2022/11/22 上午1:55, John Garry 写道:
> On 21/11/2022 15:17, Jing Zhang wrote:
>> I'm sorry that I misunderstood the purpose of putting metric as arch_std_event at first,
>> and now it works after the modification over your suggestion.
>>
>> But there are also a few questions:
>>
>> 1. The value of the slot in the topdownL1 is various in different architectures, for example,
>> the slot is 5 on neoverse-n2. If I put topdownL1 metric as arch_std_event, then I need to
>> specify the slot to 5 in n2. I can specify slot values in metric like below, but is there any
>> other concise way to do this?
>>
>> diff --git a/tools/perf/pmu-events/arch/arm64/arm/neoverse-n2/metrics.json b/tools/perf/pmu-events/arch/arm64/arm/neoverse-n2/metrics.json
>> index 8ff1dfe..b473baf 100644
>> --- a/tools/perf/pmu-events/arch/arm64/arm/neoverse-n2/metrics.json
>> +++ b/tools/perf/pmu-events/arch/arm64/arm/neoverse-n2/metrics.json
>> @@ -1,4 +1,23 @@
>> [
>> +       {
>> +               "MetricExpr": "5",
>> +               "PublicDescription": "A pipeline slot represents the hardware resources needed to process one uOp",
>> +               "BriefDescription": "A pipeline slot represents the hardware resources needed to process one uOp",
>> +               "MetricName": "slot"
> 
> Ehhh....I'm not sure if that is a good idea. Ian or anyone else have an opinion on this? It is possible to reuse metrics, so it should work, but...
> 
> One problem is that "slot" would show up as a metric, which you would not want.
> 
> Alternatively I was going to suggest that you can overwrite specific std arch event attributes. So for example of frontend_bound, you could have:
> 
> + b/tools/perf/pmu-events/arch/arm64/arm/neoverse-n2/metrics.json
> @@ -0,0 +1,30 @@
> [
>     {
>     "ArchStdEvent": "FRONTEND_BOUND",
>         "MetricExpr": "(stall_slot_frontend - cpu_cycles) / (5 * cpu_cycles)",
>     },
> 
>> +       }
>> +       {
>> +               "ArchStdEvent": "FRONTEND_BOUND"
>> +       },
>> +       {
>> +               "ArchStdEvent": "BACKEND_BOUND"
>> +       },
>> +       {
>> +               "ArchStdEvent": "WASTED"
>> +       },
>> +       {
>> +               "ArchStdEvent": "RETIRING"
>> +       },
>>
>>
>> 2. Should I add the topdownL1 metric to tools/perf/pmu-event/recommended.json,
>> or create a new json file to place the general metric?
> 
> It would not belong in recommended.json as that is specifically for arch-recommended events. It would really just depend on where the value comes from, i.e. arm arm or sbsa.
> 


Thanks for your suggestion, I will send next patchset as you suggested.