[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAM9d7cgSwZ3PU3H9VNvxQakocEZ_CQEqB9M1o3xTMdJ7F1sufQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 30 May 2024 23:40:53 -0700
From: Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>
To: weilin.wang@...el.com
Cc: Ian Rogers <irogers@...gle.com>, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com>, Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...nel.org>,
Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@...el.com>, Kan Liang <kan.liang@...ux.intel.com>,
linux-perf-users@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Perry Taylor <perry.taylor@...el.com>, Samantha Alt <samantha.alt@...el.com>,
Caleb Biggers <caleb.biggers@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH v10 3/8] perf stat: Fork and launch perf record when
perf stat needs to get retire latency value for a metric.
On Tue, May 28, 2024 at 11:43 PM <weilin.wang@...el.com> wrote:
>
> From: Weilin Wang <weilin.wang@...el.com>
>
> When retire_latency value is used in a metric formula, evsel would fork a perf
> record process with "-e" and "-W" options. Perf record will collect required
> retire_latency values in parallel while perf stat is collecting counting values.
>
> At the point of time that perf stat stops counting, evsel would stop perf record
> by sending sigterm signal to perf record process. Sampled data will be process
> to get retire latency value.
>
> Another thread is required to synchronize between perf stat and perf record
> when we pass data through pipe.
>
> Signed-off-by: Weilin Wang <weilin.wang@...el.com>
> ---
[SNIP]
> +int tpebs_set_evsel(struct evsel *evsel, int cpu_map_idx, int thread)
> +{
> + struct perf_counts_values *count;
> + struct tpebs_retire_lat *t;
> + bool found = false;
> + __u64 val;
> + int ret;
> +
> + /* Non reitre_latency evsel should never enter this function. */
> + if (!evsel__is_retire_lat(evsel))
> + return -1;
> +
> + ret = tpebs_stop();
> + if (ret)
> + return ret;
> +
> + count = perf_counts(evsel->counts, cpu_map_idx, thread);
> +
> + list_for_each_entry(t, &tpebs_results, nd) {
> + if (!strcmp(t->tpebs_name, evsel->name) || !strcmp(t->tpebs_name, evsel->metric_id)) {
> + found = true;
> + break;
> + }
> + }
> +
> + /* Set ena and run to non-zero */
> + count->ena = count->run = 1;
> + count->lost = 0;
> +
> + if (!found) {
> + /*
> + * Set default value or 0 when retire_latency for this event is
> + * not found from sampling data (enable_tpebs_recording not set
> + * or 0 sample recorded).
> + */
> + val = 0;
> + return 0;
> + }
> +
> + /*
> + * Only set retire_latency value to the first CPU and thread.
> + */
> + if (cpu_map_idx == 0 && thread == 0) {
> + /* Lost precision when casting from double to __u64. Any improvement? */
As I said before I think you can set t->val * 1000 and then
set the evsel->scale to 1e3 or 1e-3.
Thanks,
Namhyung
> + val = t->val;
> + } else
> + val = 0;
> +
> + count->val = val;
> + return 0;
> +}
> +
Powered by blists - more mailing lists