From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: jolsa@redhat.com (Jiri Olsa) Date: Wed, 6 Dec 2017 14:36:07 +0100 Subject: [RFC PATCH 2/5] perf jevents: add support for arch recommended events In-Reply-To: <1512490399-94107-3-git-send-email-john.garry@huawei.com> References: <1512490399-94107-1-git-send-email-john.garry@huawei.com> <1512490399-94107-3-git-send-email-john.garry@huawei.com> Message-ID: <20171206133607.GA12508@krava> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Wed, Dec 06, 2017 at 12:13:16AM +0800, John Garry wrote: > For some architectures (like arm64), there are architecture- > defined recommended events. Vendors may not be obliged to > follow the recommendation and may implement their own pmu > event for a specific event code. > > This patch adds support for parsing events from arch-defined > recommended JSONs, and then fixing up vendor events when > they have implemented these events as recommended. in the previous patch you added the vendor support, so you have arch|vendor|platform key for the event list and perf have the most current/local event list why would you need to fix it? if there's new event list, the table gets updated, perf is rebuilt.. I'm clearly missing something ;-) > In the vendor JSON, to specify that the event is supported > according to the recommendation, only the event code is > added to the JSON entry - no other event elements need be > added, like below: > [ > { > "EventCode": "0x40", > }, > > ] > > The pmu event parsing will check for "BriefDescription" > field presence only for this. > > If "BriefDescription" is present, then it is implied > that the vendor has implemented their own custom event, > and there is no fixup. Other fields are ignored. if we are going this way, please use some new token, this list is supposed to be human readable thanks, jirka From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752294AbdLFNgO (ORCPT ); Wed, 6 Dec 2017 08:36:14 -0500 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:44786 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751208AbdLFNgN (ORCPT ); Wed, 6 Dec 2017 08:36:13 -0500 Date: Wed, 6 Dec 2017 14:36:07 +0100 From: Jiri Olsa To: John Garry Cc: peterz@infradead.org, mingo@redhat.com, acme@kernel.org, alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com, namhyung@kernel.org, ak@linux.intel.com, wcohen@redhat.com, will.deacon@arm.com, ganapatrao.kulkarni@cavium.com, catalin.marinas@arm.com, mark.rutland@arm.com, xuwei5@hisilicon.com, linuxarm@huawei.com, zhangshaokun@hisilicon.com, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 2/5] perf jevents: add support for arch recommended events Message-ID: <20171206133607.GA12508@krava> References: <1512490399-94107-1-git-send-email-john.garry@huawei.com> <1512490399-94107-3-git-send-email-john.garry@huawei.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1512490399-94107-3-git-send-email-john.garry@huawei.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.9.1 (2017-09-22) X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.5.16 (mx1.redhat.com [10.5.110.30]); Wed, 06 Dec 2017 13:36:13 +0000 (UTC) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Dec 06, 2017 at 12:13:16AM +0800, John Garry wrote: > For some architectures (like arm64), there are architecture- > defined recommended events. Vendors may not be obliged to > follow the recommendation and may implement their own pmu > event for a specific event code. > > This patch adds support for parsing events from arch-defined > recommended JSONs, and then fixing up vendor events when > they have implemented these events as recommended. in the previous patch you added the vendor support, so you have arch|vendor|platform key for the event list and perf have the most current/local event list why would you need to fix it? if there's new event list, the table gets updated, perf is rebuilt.. I'm clearly missing something ;-) > In the vendor JSON, to specify that the event is supported > according to the recommendation, only the event code is > added to the JSON entry - no other event elements need be > added, like below: > [ > { > "EventCode": "0x40", > }, > > ] > > The pmu event parsing will check for "BriefDescription" > field presence only for this. > > If "BriefDescription" is present, then it is implied > that the vendor has implemented their own custom event, > and there is no fixup. Other fields are ignored. if we are going this way, please use some new token, this list is supposed to be human readable thanks, jirka