[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <b81536bd-6e03-431d-9f9f-5d048fd69f2f@linux.intel.com>
Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2025 16:20:44 +0800
From: "Mi, Dapeng" <dapeng1.mi@...ux.intel.com>
To: Ian Rogers <irogers@...gle.com>, Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>,
Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com>,
Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...nel.org>, Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@...el.com>,
James Clark <james.clark@...aro.org>, Xu Yang <xu.yang_2@....com>,
Chun-Tse Shao <ctshao@...gle.com>, Thomas Richter <tmricht@...ux.ibm.com>,
Sumanth Korikkar <sumanthk@...ux.ibm.com>,
Collin Funk <collin.funk1@...il.com>, Thomas Falcon
<thomas.falcon@...el.com>, Howard Chu <howardchu95@...il.com>,
Levi Yun <yeoreum.yun@....com>, Yang Li <yang.lee@...ux.alibaba.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-perf-users@...r.kernel.org,
Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>, Weilin Wang <weilin.wang@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 00/18]
On 11/12/2025 7:13 AM, Ian Rogers wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 11, 2025 at 2:42 PM Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org> wrote:
>> On Tue, Nov 11, 2025 at 01:21:48PM -0800, Ian Rogers wrote:
>>> Prior to this series stat-shadow would produce hard coded metrics if
>>> certain events appeared in the evlist. This series produces equivalent
>>> json metrics and cleans up the consequences in tests and display
>>> output. A before and after of the default display output on a
>>> tigerlake is:
>>>
>>> Before:
>>> ```
>>> $ perf stat -a sleep 1
>>>
>>> Performance counter stats for 'system wide':
>>>
>>> 16,041,816,418 cpu-clock # 15.995 CPUs utilized
>>> 5,749 context-switches # 358.376 /sec
>>> 121 cpu-migrations # 7.543 /sec
>>> 1,806 page-faults # 112.581 /sec
>>> 825,965,204 instructions # 0.70 insn per cycle
>>> 1,180,799,101 cycles # 0.074 GHz
>>> 168,945,109 branches # 10.532 M/sec
>>> 4,629,567 branch-misses # 2.74% of all branches
>>> # 30.2 % tma_backend_bound
>>> # 7.8 % tma_bad_speculation
>>> # 47.1 % tma_frontend_bound
>>> # 14.9 % tma_retiring
>>> ```
>>>
>>> After:
>>> ```
>>> $ perf stat -a sleep 1
>>>
>>> Performance counter stats for 'system wide':
>>>
>>> 2,890 context-switches # 179.9 cs/sec cs_per_second
>>> 16,061,923,339 cpu-clock # 16.0 CPUs CPUs_utilized
>>> 43 cpu-migrations # 2.7 migrations/sec migrations_per_second
>>> 5,645 page-faults # 351.5 faults/sec page_faults_per_second
>>> 5,708,413 branch-misses # 1.4 % branch_miss_rate (88.83%)
>>> 429,978,120 branches # 26.8 M/sec branch_frequency (88.85%)
>>> 1,626,915,897 cpu-cycles # 0.1 GHz cycles_frequency (88.84%)
>>> 2,556,805,534 instructions # 1.5 instructions insn_per_cycle (88.86%)
>>> TopdownL1 # 20.1 % tma_backend_bound
>>> # 40.5 % tma_bad_speculation (88.90%)
>>> # 17.2 % tma_frontend_bound (78.05%)
>>> # 22.2 % tma_retiring (88.89%)
>>>
>>> 1.002994394 seconds time elapsed
>>> ```
>>>
>>> Having the metrics in json brings greater uniformity, allows events to
>>> be shared by metrics, and it also allows descriptions like:
>>> ```
>>> $ perf list cs_per_second
>>> ...
>>> cs_per_second
>>> [Context switches per CPU second]
>>> ```
>>>
>>> A thorn in the side of doing this work was that the hard coded metrics
>>> were used by perf script with '-F metric'. This functionality didn't
>>> work for me (I was testing `perf record -e instructions,cycles`
>>> with/without leader sampling and then `perf script -F metric` but saw
>>> nothing but empty lines) but anyway I decided to fix it to the best of
>>> my ability in this series. So the script side counters were removed
>>> and the regular ones associated with the evsel used. The json metrics
>>> were all searched looking for ones that have a subset of events
>>> matching those in the perf script session, and all metrics are
>>> printed. This is kind of weird as the counters are being set by the
>>> period of samples, but I carried the behavior forward. I suspect there
>>> needs to be follow up work to make this better, but what is in the
>>> series is superior to what is currently in the tree. Follow up work
>>> could include finding metrics for the machine in the perf.data rather
>>> than using the host, allowing multiple metrics even if the metric ids
>>> of the events differ, fixing pre-existing `perf stat record/report`
>>> issues, etc.
>>>
>>> There is a lot of stat tests that, for example, assume '-e
>>> instructions,cycles' will produce an IPC metric. These things needed
>>> tidying as now the metric must be explicitly asked for and when doing
>>> this ones using software events were preferred to increase
>>> compatibility. As the test updates were numerous they are distinct to
>>> the patches updating the functionality causing periods in the series
>>> where not all tests are passing. If this is undesirable the test fixes
>>> can be squashed into the functionality updates, but this will be kind
>>> of messy, especially as at some points in the series both the old
>>> metrics and the new metrics will be displayed.
>>>
>>> v4: K/sec to M/sec on branch frequency (Namhyung), perf script -F
>>> metric to-done a system-wide calculation (Namhyung) and don't
>>> crash because of the CPU map index couldn't be found. Regenerate
>>> commit messages but the cpu-clock was always yielding 0 on my
>>> machine leading to a lot of nan metric values.
>> This is strange. The cpu-clock should not be 0 as long as you ran it.
>> Do you think it's related to the scale unit change? I tested v3 and
>> didn't see the problem.
> It looked like a kernel issue. The raw counts were 0 before being
> scaled. All metrics always work on unscaled values. It is only the
> commit messages and the formatting is more important than the numeric
> values - which were correct for a cpu-clock of 0.
Yes, It's a kernel issue. I also found it several days ago. I have posted a
patch to fix it. :)
https://lore.kernel.org/all/20251112080526.3971392-1-dapeng1.mi@linux.intel.com/
>
> Thanks,
> Ian
>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists