Em Thu, Mar 18, 2021 at 01:16:37PM +0100, Jiri Olsa escreveu: > On Wed, Mar 17, 2021 at 10:42:45AM -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote: > > Em Wed, Mar 17, 2021 at 08:17:52PM +0800, Jin, Yao escreveu: > > > I'm OK to only support 'cpu_core/cpu-cycles/' or 'cpu_atom/cpu-cycles/'. > > > But > > > what would we do for cache event?
> > > 'perf stat -e LLC-loads' is OK, but 'perf stat -e cpu/LLC-loads/' is not > > > supported currently. > > > For hybrid platform, user may only want to enable the LLC-loads on core > > > CPUs > > > or on atom CPUs. That's reasonable. While if we don't support the pmu > > > style > > > event, how to satisfy this requirement? > > > If we can support the pmu style event, we can also use the same way for > > > cpu_core/cycles/. At least it's not a bad thing, right? :) > > While we're discussing, do we really want to use the "core" and "atom" > > terms here? I thought cpu/cycles/ would be ok for the main (Big) CPU and > > that we should come up with some short name for the "litle" CPUs. > > Won't we have the same situation with ARM where we want to know the > > number of cycles spent on a BIG core and also on a little one? > > Perhaps 'cycles' should mean all cycles, and then we use 'big/cycles/' and > > 'little/cycles/'? > do arm servers already export multiple pmus like this? > I did not notice I haven't checked, but AFAIK this BIG/Little kind of arch started there, Mark? - Arnaldo > it'd be definitely great to have some unite way for this, > so far we have the hybrid pmu detection and support in > hw events like cycles/instructions.. which should be easy > to follow on arm > > there's also support to have these events on specific pmu > pmu/cycles/ , which I still need to check on
