Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 25 Sep 2014 19:25:20 -0700 | From | Sukadev Bhattiprolu <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH v4 01/10] tools/perf: support parsing parameterized events |
| |
Jiri Olsa [jolsa@redhat.com] wrote: | On Wed, Sep 24, 2014 at 12:27:15PM -0700, Sukadev Bhattiprolu wrote: | > From: Cody P Schafer <cody@linux.vnet.ibm.com> | > | > Enable event specification like: | > | > pmu/event_name,param1=0x1,param2=0x4/ | > | > Assuming that | > | > /sys/bus/event_source/devices/pmu/events/event_name | > | > Contains something like | > | > param2=foo,bar=1,param1=baz | | hum, so what happened to the '?' ... AFAIU from out last discussion, | you wanted to mark terms which are mandatory and user must provide | values for them.. and I thought the decision was to have following | alias record: | | $ cat /sys/bus/event_source/devices/pmu/events/event_name | param2=?,bar=1,param1=? | | while perf would scream if any of param1/2 wasnt filled like for: | pmu/event_name,param1=0x1/
Sorry, I meant to make perf list consistent with sysfs.
Consider these two sysfs entries:
$ cat HPM_0THRD_NON_IDLE_CCYC__PHYS_CORE domain=0x2,offset=0xe0,starting_index=core,lpar=0x0
$ cat HPM_0THRD_NON_IDLE_CCYC__VCPU_HOME_CORE domain=0x3,offset=0xe0,starting_index=vcpu,lpar=sibling_guest_id
In the first one, starting_index refers to a 'core' while in the second it refers to a vcpu. This serves as a "hint" for the parameter's meaning.
By replacing both with 'starting_index=?' we lose that hint.
Should we fix both sysfs and 'perf list' to say
starting_index=?core
Sukadev
| |