Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [RFC PATCH 3/3 v2] perf: Update perf tool to monitor uncore events | From | Lin Ming <> | Date | Sun, 21 Nov 2010 22:19:26 +0800 |
| |
On Sun, 2010-11-21 at 20:22 +0800, Stephane Eranian wrote: > On Sun, Nov 21, 2010 at 1:09 PM, Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org> wrote: > > > >> > >> samples pcnt function DSO > >> _______ _____ ______________________ > >> ____________________________________ > >> > >> 8.00 18.6% kallsyms_expand_symbol [kernel.kallsyms] > > > > Reporting a symbol for an uncore event seems highly misleading. > > After all the uncore counter has no idea for which core the event was, > > so there isn't really any instruction pointer to report. > > The event could be event caused by a PCI device or similar. > > > > For per function monitoring of uncore events one has to use > > OFFCORE_RESPONSE, like I implemented recently. > > > > I would suggest to not report any symbol names for uncore events. > > Doing so just will confuse users. > > > > In fact I suspect uncore events are only really useful > > with "stat", but not with "top", or if they are used in top > > then the symbol reporting should be disabled. > > > I agree, uncore should only be used for counting on a > per-cpu basis. You can leave the perf tool as is, but > that opens up the risk of misinterpretation by many users, > or you restrict this in the tool directly which is the better > solution in my mind.
I agree restricting the tool is a better idea. How about below?
#one cpu stat is allowed perf stat -e ruNNNN -C <cpu> perf stat -e ruNNNN -C <cpu> -p <pid> perf stat -e ruNNNN -C <cpu> -- <command>
#per thread is NOT allowed perf stat -e ruNNNN -p <pid> perf stat -e ruNNNN -- <command>
#all cpus stat is NOT allowed, because it will mess the results perf stat -e ruNNNN -a
| |