From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751508Ab0EJLyP (ORCPT ); Mon, 10 May 2010 07:54:15 -0400 Received: from mx3.mail.elte.hu ([157.181.1.138]:39760 "EHLO mx3.mail.elte.hu" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750970Ab0EJLyO (ORCPT ); Mon, 10 May 2010 07:54:14 -0400 Date: Mon, 10 May 2010 13:53:44 +0200 From: Ingo Molnar To: Peter Zijlstra Cc: Lin Ming , Frederic Weisbecker , "eranian@gmail.com" , "Gary.Mohr@Bull.com" , Corey Ashford , "arjan@linux.intel.com" , "Zhang, Yanmin" , Paul Mackerras , "David S. Miller" , Russell King , Paul Mundt , lkml , Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo , Will Deacon Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 3/9] perf: export registerred pmus via sysfs Message-ID: <20100510115344.GA11238@elte.hu> References: <1273483623.15998.57.camel@minggr.sh.intel.com> <1273484401.5605.3333.camel@twins> <1273486313.15998.76.camel@minggr.sh.intel.com> <1273486708.5605.3342.camel@twins> <1273487195.15998.85.camel@minggr.sh.intel.com> <1273490824.5605.3379.camel@twins> <20100510114311.GA6449@elte.hu> <1273492164.5605.3397.camel@twins> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1273492164.5605.3397.camel@twins> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-08-17) X-ELTE-SpamScore: -2.0 X-ELTE-SpamLevel: X-ELTE-SpamCheck: no X-ELTE-SpamVersion: ELTE 2.0 X-ELTE-SpamCheck-Details: score=-2.0 required=5.9 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=no SpamAssassin version=3.2.5 -2.0 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 0 to 1% [score: 0.0000] Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org * Peter Zijlstra wrote: > On Mon, 2010-05-10 at 13:43 +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > > > Yeah, we really want a mechanism like this in place instead of continuing with > > the somewhat ad-hoc extensions to the event enumeration space. > > > > One detail: i think we want one more level. Instead of: > > > > /sys/devices/system/node/nodeN/node_events > > node_events/event_source_id > > node_events/local_misses > > /local_hits > > /remote_misses > > /remote_hits > > /... > > > > We want the individual events to be a directory, containing the event_id: > > > > /sys/devices/system/node/nodeN/node_events > > node_events/event_source_id > > node_events/local_misses/event_id > > /local_hits/event_id > > /remote_misses/event_id > > /remote_hits/event_id > > /... > > > > The reason is that we want to keep our options open to add more attributes to > > individual events. (In fact extended attributes already exist for certain > > event classes - such as the 'format' info for tracepoints.) > > Sure, sounds like a sensible suggestion. > > One thing I'd also like to clarify is that !raw events should not be > exhaustive hardware event lists, those are best left for userspace, but > instead are generally useful events that can be expected to be implemented > by any hardware of that particular class. > > So a GPU might have things like 'vsync' and 'cmd_pipeline_stall' or whatever > is a generic GPU feature, but not very implementation specific things that > the next generation of hardware won't ever have. Definitely so. Ingo