[lkml]   [2010]   [Dec]   [23]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: [RFC PATCH] perf: Add load latency monitoring on Intel Nehalem/Westmere
    On Wed, 2010-12-22 at 18:45 +0800, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
    > On Wed, 2010-12-22 at 11:08 +0100, Stephane Eranian wrote:
    > > Yes, I think there is more to it than just data source, unfortunately.
    > > If you want to avoid returning an opaque u64 (PERF_SAMPLE_EXTRA), then
    > > you need to break it down: PERF_SAMPLE_DATA_SRC, PERF_SAMPLE_XX
    > > and so on.
    > I guess we can do things like:
    > Satisfied by {L1, L2, L3, RAM}x{snoop, local, remote} + unknown, and
    > encode "Pending core cache HIT" as L2-snoop or something, whatever is
    > most appropriate.
    > But does that cover every architecture?
    > Also, since that doesn't require more that 4 bits to encode, we could
    > try and categorize what else is around and try and create a well
    > specified _EXTRA register, I mean, we still got 60bits left after this.

    Could you tell more about this well specified _EXTRA register?

     \ /
      Last update: 2010-12-23 09:27    [W:0.020 / U:3.288 seconds]
    ©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site