Messages in this thread | | | Date | Tue, 30 Jun 2009 11:57:38 +0200 | From | Ingo Molnar <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 2/3 -tip] perf_counter tools: Add support to set of multiple events in one shot |
| |
* Jaswinder Singh Rajput <jaswinder@kernel.org> wrote:
> On Mon, 2009-06-29 at 05:57 +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > > The above patterns i suggested _already cover_ 'multiple events'. > > > > We might define further aliases like: > > > > all := "*" > > all-sw := "sw-*" > > > > but it should all be in terms of patterns and regular > > expressions, not via some hardcoded special-case thing as your > > posted patches did. > > > > It seems to me very confusing and needs lot of book-keeping and > need to rewrite whole tools/perf/util/parse-events.c because : > > * means all perf_event_types : > PERF_TYPE_HARDWARE, > PERF_TYPE_SOFTWARE, > PERF_TYPE_TRACEPOINT, > PERF_TYPE_HW_CACHE, > PERF_TYPE_RAW > > hw-* means all hardware events : > PERF_TYPE_HARDWARE, > PERF_TYPE_HW_CACHE, > PERF_TYPE_RAW > > sw-* means all software events : > PERF_TYPE_SOFTWARE, > PERF_TYPE_TRACEPOINT > > *cache* means all cache based events : > PERF_COUNT_CACHE_REFERENCES, /* Generalized H/W */ > PERF_COUNT_CACHE_MISSES, /* Generalized H/W */ > PERF_TYPE_HW_CACHE, /* Generalized Cache */ > > *write* means all write based events : > (L1D, WRITE, ACCESS), > (L1D, WRITE, MISS), > (LL, WRITE, ACCESS), > (LL, WRITE, MISS), > (DTLB, WRITE, ACCESS), > (DTLB, WRITE, MISS) > > Please let me know why it looks complex to me, is it really > complex or I am going in wrong direction.
It would certainly need some reorganization of the code but the end result would be more flexible and other places could use it too, for example:
perf test -e hw-*
would test all (known) hardware counters.
Ingo
| |