lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2009]   [Jun]   [23]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH -tip] perf_counter tools: shorten names for events

* Jaswinder Singh Rajput <jaswinder@kernel.org> wrote:

> After :
>
> Performance counter stats for 'ls -lR /usr/include/':
>
> 259250339 L1-d-load-refs (scaled from 22.73%)
> 1187200 L1-d-load-miss (scaled from 23.01%)
> 150454 L1-d-store-refs (scaled from 23.01%)
> 494252 L1-d-prefetch-refs (scaled from 23.29%)
> 362661 L1-d-prefetch-miss (scaled from 23.73%)
> 247343449 L1-i-load-refs (scaled from 23.71%)
> 4804990 L1-i-load-miss (scaled from 23.85%)
> 108711 L1-i-prefetch-refs (scaled from 23.83%)
> 6260313 L2-load-refs (scaled from 23.82%)
> 605425 L2-load-miss (scaled from 23.82%)
> 6898075 L2-store-refs (scaled from 23.96%)
> 248334160 d-TLB-load-refs (scaled from 23.95%)
> 3812835 d-TLB-load-miss (scaled from 23.87%)
> 253208496 i-TLB-load-refs (scaled from 23.73%)
> 5873 i-TLB-load-miss (scaled from 23.46%)
> 110891027 Branch-load-refs (scaled from 23.21%)
> 5529622 Branch-load-miss (scaled from 23.02%)

here's an edited version of my suggestions:

> 259250339 dL1-loads (scaled from 22.73%)
> 1187200 dL1-load-misses (scaled from 23.01%)
> 150454 dL1-stores (scaled from 23.01%)
> 494252 dL1-prefetches (scaled from 23.29%)
> 362661 dL1-prefetch-misses (scaled from 23.73%)
> 247343449 iL1-loads (scaled from 23.71%)
> 4804990 iL1-load-misses (scaled from 23.85%)
> 108711 iL1-prefetches (scaled from 23.83%)
> 6260313 LLC-loads (scaled from 23.82%)
> 605425 LLC-load-misses (scaled from 23.82%)
> 6898075 LLC-stores (scaled from 23.96%)
> 248334160 dTLB-loads (scaled from 23.95%)
> 3812835 dTLB-load-misses (scaled from 23.87%)
> 253208496 iTLB-loads (scaled from 23.73%)
> 5873 iTLB-load-misses (scaled from 23.46%)
> 110891027 branches (scaled from 23.21%)
> 5529622 branch-misses (scaled from 23.02%)

We can leave out 'refs' i think - without any qualification
statements like '247343449 iL1-loads' are still unambigious i think.

Plus we can abbreviate dL1/iL1/dTLB/iTLB. The capitalization
matters. Also, note that it's LLC (Last Level Cache), not L2.

( Sidenote: L2 can still be an alias for LLC, even though some CPUs
have a L3 too. )

Note, branches are special - we dont really have 'branch loads',
branches are executions. 'Branches' and 'Branch-misses' are the
right term.

Do you agree?

Ingo


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2009-06-23 21:59    [W:0.091 / U:7.220 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site