Messages in this thread |  | | | Date | Mon, 10 May 2010 13:53:44 +0200 | | From | Ingo Molnar <> | | Subject | Re: [RFC][PATCH 3/9] perf: export registerred pmus via sysfs |
| |
* Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org> wrote:
> On Mon, 2010-05-10 at 13:43 +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > > > Yeah, we really want a mechanism like this in place instead of continuing with > > the somewhat ad-hoc extensions to the event enumeration space. > > > > One detail: i think we want one more level. Instead of: > > > > /sys/devices/system/node/nodeN/node_events > > node_events/event_source_id > > node_events/local_misses > > /local_hits > > /remote_misses > > /remote_hits > > /... > > > > We want the individual events to be a directory, containing the event_id: > > > > /sys/devices/system/node/nodeN/node_events > > node_events/event_source_id > > node_events/local_misses/event_id > > /local_hits/event_id > > /remote_misses/event_id > > /remote_hits/event_id > > /... > > > > The reason is that we want to keep our options open to add more attributes to > > individual events. (In fact extended attributes already exist for certain > > event classes - such as the 'format' info for tracepoints.) > > Sure, sounds like a sensible suggestion. > > One thing I'd also like to clarify is that !raw events should not be > exhaustive hardware event lists, those are best left for userspace, but > instead are generally useful events that can be expected to be implemented > by any hardware of that particular class. > > So a GPU might have things like 'vsync' and 'cmd_pipeline_stall' or whatever > is a generic GPU feature, but not very implementation specific things that > the next generation of hardware won't ever have.
Definitely so.
Ingo
|  |