On Tue, Mar 02, 2021 at 09:25:24AM -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
> Em Tue, Mar 02, 2021 at 11:08:40AM +0900, Namhyung Kim escreveu:
> > On Tue, Mar 2, 2021 at 4:19 AM Jiri Olsa <jo...@redhat.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > On Tue, Mar 02, 2021 at 01:24:02AM +0800, Changbin Du wrote:
> > > > This does follow two changes:
> > > >   1) Select appropriate unit between K/M/G.
> > > >   2) Use 'cpu-sec' instead of 'sec' to state this is not the wall-time.
> > > >
> > > > $ sudo ./perf stat -a -- sleep 1
> > > >
> > > > Before: Unit 'M' is selected even the number is very small.
> > > >  Performance counter stats for 'system wide':
> > > >
> > > >           4,003.06 msec cpu-clock                 #    3.998 CPUs 
> > > > utilized
> > > >             16,179      context-switches          #    0.004 M/sec
> > > >                161      cpu-migrations            #    0.040 K/sec
> > > >              4,699      page-faults               #    0.001 M/sec
> > > >      6,135,801,925      cycles                    #    1.533 GHz        
> > > >               (83.21%)
> > > >      5,783,308,491      stalled-cycles-frontend   #   94.26% frontend 
> > > > cycles idle     (83.21%)
> > > >      4,543,694,050      stalled-cycles-backend    #   74.05% backend 
> > > > cycles idle      (66.49%)
> > > >      4,720,130,587      instructions              #    0.77  insn per 
> > > > cycle
> > > >                                                   #    1.23  stalled 
> > > > cycles per insn  (83.28%)
> > > >        753,848,078      branches                  #  188.318 M/sec      
> > > >               (83.61%)
> > > >         37,457,747      branch-misses             #    4.97% of all 
> > > > branches          (83.48%)
> > > >
> > > >        1.001283725 seconds time elapsed
> > > >
> > > > After:
> > > > $ sudo ./perf stat -a -- sleep 2
> > > >
> > > >  Performance counter stats for 'system wide':
> > > >
> > > >           8,003.20 msec cpu-clock                 #    3.998 CPUs 
> > > > utilized
> > > >              9,768      context-switches          #    1.221 K/cpu-sec
> > > >                164      cpu-migrations            #   20.492  /cpu-sec
> > >
> > > should you remove also the leading '/' in ' /cpu-sec' ?
> > 
> > The change looks good.  And I think we should keep '/' otherwise it'd be
> > more confusing.
> 
> Perhaps:
> 
>            8,003.20 msec cpu-clock                 #    3.998 CPUs utilized
>               9,768      context-switches          #    1.221 K/cpu-sec
>                 164      cpu-migrations            #   20.492 /cpu-sec
> 
> ?
>
sure. Now it is:
$ sudo ./perf stat 
[sudo] password for changbin: 
^C
 Performance counter stats for 'system wide':

          6,046.61 msec cpu-clock                 #    3.999 CPUs utilized      
    
             7,569      context-switches          #    1.252 K/sec              
    
               587      cpu-migrations            #   97.079 /sec               
    
               229      page-faults               #   37.872 /sec               
    
     1,484,855,385      cycles                    #    0.246 GHz                
    
     2,112,863,483      stalled-cycles-frontend   #  142.29% frontend cycles 
idle   
     1,980,746,623      stalled-cycles-backend    #  133.40% backend cycles 
idle    
       454,477,035      instructions              #    0.31  insn per cycle     
    
                                                  #    4.65  stalled cycles per 
insn
        89,992,521      branches                  #   14.883 M/sec              
    
         6,196,599      branch-misses             #    6.89% of all branches    
    

       1.512029866 seconds time elapsed

 
> - Arnaldo
>  
> > >
> > >
> > > SNIP
> > >
> > > > @@ -1270,18 +1271,14 @@ void perf_stat__print_shadow_stats(struct 
> > > > perf_stat_config *config,
> > > >               generic_metric(config, evsel->metric_expr, 
> > > > evsel->metric_events, NULL,
> > > >                               evsel->name, evsel->metric_name, NULL, 1, 
> > > > cpu, out, st);
> > > >       } else if (runtime_stat_n(st, STAT_NSECS, cpu, &rsd) != 0) {
> > > > -             char unit = 'M';
> > > > +             char unit = ' ';
> > > >               char unit_buf[10];
> > > >
> > > >               total = runtime_stat_avg(st, STAT_NSECS, cpu, &rsd);
> > > > -
> > > >               if (total)
> > > > -                     ratio = 1000.0 * avg / total;
> > > > -             if (ratio < 0.001) {
> > > > -                     ratio *= 1000;
> > > > -                     unit = 'K';
> > > > -             }
> > > > -             snprintf(unit_buf, sizeof(unit_buf), "%c/sec", unit);
> > > > +                     ratio = convert_unit_double(1000000000.0 * avg / 
> > > > total, &unit);
> > > > +
> > > > +             snprintf(unit_buf, sizeof(unit_buf), "%c/cpu-sec", unit);
> > > >               print_metric(config, ctxp, NULL, "%8.3f", unit_buf, 
> > > > ratio);
> > >
> > > hum this will change -x output that people parse, so I don't think we can 
> > > do that
> > 
> > Agreed.
> > 
> > >
> > > >       } else if (perf_stat_evsel__is(evsel, SMI_NUM)) {
> > > >               print_smi_cost(config, cpu, out, st, &rsd);
> > > > diff --git a/tools/perf/util/units.c b/tools/perf/util/units.c
> > > > index a46762aec4c9..ac13b5ecde31 100644
> > > > --- a/tools/perf/util/units.c
> > > > +++ b/tools/perf/util/units.c
> > > > @@ -55,6 +55,28 @@ unsigned long convert_unit(unsigned long value, char 
> > > > *unit)
> > > >       return value;
> > > >  }
> > > >
> > > > +double convert_unit_double(double value, char *unit)
> > > > +{
> > > > +     *unit = ' ';
> > > > +
> > > > +     if (value > 1000.0) {
> > > > +             value /= 1000.0;
> > > > +             *unit = 'K';
> > > > +     }
> > > > +
> > > > +     if (value > 1000.0) {
> > > > +             value /= 1000.0;
> > > > +             *unit = 'M';
> > > > +     }
> > > > +
> > > > +     if (value > 1000.0) {
> > > > +             value /= 1000.0;
> > > > +             *unit = 'G';
> > > > +     }
> > > > +
> > > > +     return value;
> > > > +}
> > >
> > > we have convert_unit function just above doing the same only with
> > > unsigned long.. let's have one base function with double values and
> > > another one casting the result to unsigned long
> > 
> > Sounds good.
> > 
> > Thanks,
> > Namhyung
> 
> -- 
> 
> - Arnaldo

-- 
Cheers,
Changbin Du

Reply via email to