Re: [PATCH v1 4/6] perf vendor events intel: Update lunarlake events from 1.22 to 1.25

["Mi, Dapeng" <dapeng1.mi@linux.intel.com>]

On 6/10/2026 6:58 AM, Chun-Tse Shao wrote:
> + Dapeng and Edward
>
> On Tue, Jun 9, 2026 at 3:02 PM <sashiko-bot@kernel.org> wrote:
>> Thank you for your contribution! Sashiko AI review found 1 potential issue(s) to consider:
>> - [Medium] Accidental deletion of the UMask field for the BR_INST_RETIRED.COND_TAKEN_FWD PMU event, making it an alias of ALL_BRANCHES.
>> --
>>
>> commit 5c9c0d0a9a04ac6fce773f8ccf00f8df75a3f68d
>> Author: Chun-Tse Shao <ctshao@google.com>
>>
>> perf vendor events intel: Update lunarlake events from 1.22 to 1.25
>>
>> This commit updates the Lunar Lake PMU events from version 1.22 to 1.25
>> based on the upstream intel/perfmon repository.
>>
>>> diff --git a/tools/perf/pmu-events/arch/x86/lunarlake/pipeline.json b/tools/perf/pmu-events/arch/x86/lunarlake/pipeline.json
>>> index d66eafccebbb6..a7467b2f291de 100644
>>> --- a/tools/perf/pmu-events/arch/x86/lunarlake/pipeline.json
>>> +++ b/tools/perf/pmu-events/arch/x86/lunarlake/pipeline.json
>>> @@ -190,7 +190,6 @@
>>>          "EventName": "BR_INST_RETIRED.COND_TAKEN_FWD",
>>>          "PublicDescription": "Counts taken forward conditional branch instructions retired. Available PDIST counters: 0,1",
>>>          "SampleAfterValue": "400009",
>>> -        "UMask": "0x102",
>> [Severity: Medium]
>> Was the UMask field intentionally removed here?
>>
>> When UMask is missing, it is omitted from the generated event string.
>> The kernel PMU driver interprets omitted mask bits as zero, which makes
>> EventCode 0xc4 with UMask 0x00 an exact match for the ALL_BRANCHES event.
>>
>> Does this cause BR_INST_RETIRED.COND_TAKEN_FWD to incorrectly count all
>> branches instead of only forward-taken conditional branches, potentially
>> corrupting Topdown metrics that rely on this branching ratio?
>>
>> (This same UMask removal also appears to happen in the parallel Arrow Lake
>> update patch within this series).
> From perfmon: https://github.com/intel/perfmon/commit/5535a3e8cc14ae8ef58013cf3d8e9480018b911a
> It seems like the umask of `BR_INST_RETIRED.COND_TAKEN_FWD` is changed
> from 0x02 to 0x00.
> Can you confirm if that is correct?

I suppose it's correct, but need double check. Thanks.


>
> Thanks,
> CT
>
>>>          "Unit": "cpu_core"
>>>      },
>> --
>> Sashiko AI review · https://sashiko.dev/#/patchset/20260609215046.2391903-1-ctshao@google.com?part=4