lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2020]   [Mar]   [11]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
Date
SubjectRe: [PATCH] perf tools: add support for lipfm4
On Wed, Mar 11, 2020 at 9:13 AM Jiri Olsa <jolsa@redhat.com> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Mar 10, 2020 at 02:39:23PM -0700, Stephane Eranian wrote:
> > On Tue, Mar 10, 2020 at 12:59 PM Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Tue, Mar 10, 2020 at 11:50:03AM -0700, Ian Rogers wrote:
> > > > This patch links perf with the libpfm4 library.
> > > > This library contains all the hardware event tables for all
> > > > processors supported by perf_events. This is a helper library
> > > > that help convert from a symbolic event name to the event
> > > > encoding required by the underlying kernel interface. This
> > > > library is open-source and available from: http://perfmon2.sf.net.
> > >
> > > For most CPUs the builtin perf JSON event support should make
> > > this redundant.
> > >
> > We decided to post this patch to propose an alternative to the JSON
> > file approach. It could be an option during the build.
> > The libpfm4 library has been around for 15 years now. Therefore, it
> > supports a lot of processors core and uncore and it is very portable.
> > The key value add I see is that this is a library that can be, and has
> > been, used by tool developers directly in their apps. It can
> > work with more than Linux perf_events interface. It is not tied to the
> > interface. It has well defined and documented entry points.
> > We do use libpfm4 extensively at Google in both the perf tool and
> > applications. The PAPI toolkit also relies on this library.
> >
> > I don't see this as competing with the JSON approach. It is just an
> > option I'd like to offer to users especially those familiar
> > with it in their apps.
>
> I dont mind having it, in fact I found really old email where I'm
> asking Peter about that ;-) and he wasn't very keen about that:
> https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/1312806326.10488.30.camel@twins/
>
> not sure what was the actual reason at that time and if anything
> changed since.. Peter?
>
> btw I can't apply even that v2 on latest Arnaldo's branch
>
> jirka

Thanks Jiri,

the patches were done on tip.git/master, perhaps there is a conflict
with the Documents Makefile due to adding better man page dates? I'll
try to repro building on
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/acme/linux.git/ on the
perf/core branch unless you have a different suggestion? I also
noticed a warning crept into the Makefile.config in the v2 patch set
that should be removed.

Ian

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2020-03-11 20:32    [W:0.136 / U:0.508 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site