From: Qi Liu <liuqi115@huawei.com>
To: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <arnaldo.melo@gmail.com>
Cc: peterz@infradead.org, mingo@redhat.com, ak@linux.intel.com,
mark.rutland@arm.com, alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com,
jolsa@redhat.com, namhyung@kernel.org,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org,
linuxarm@huawei.com, john.garry@huawei.com,
zhangshaokun@hisilicon.com, huangdaode@hisilicon.com,
linyunsheng@huawei.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Perf stat: Fix the ratio comments of miss-events
Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2019 14:37:48 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1f6d8522-10df-4a68-47f5-978afc827d80@huawei.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20191119155936.GC24290@kernel.org>
Hi, Arnaldo:
Thanks for your reply and sorry for replying this mail so late.
I reflowed all the lines to keep the number of characters in each line
less than 80. But I realized that the original code has exceeded 80. So
if this code format isn't necessary, and to make it easier to compare
the changes, I'll send a new patch as follow:
- out->print_metric(config, out->ctx, color, "%7.2f%%", "of all L1-dcache hits", ratio);
+ out->print_metric(config, out->ctx, color, "%7.2f%%", "of all L1-dcache accesses", ratio);
Thanks
Qi Liu
On 2019/11/19 23:59, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
> Em Sat, Nov 16, 2019 at 03:48:41PM +0800, lqqq341 escreveu:
>> From: Qi Liu <liuqi115@hisilicon.com>
>>
>> Perf stat displays miss ratio of L1-dcache, L1-icache, dTLB cache,
>> iTLB cache and LL-cache. Take L1-dcache for example, its miss ratio
>> is caculated as "L1-dcache-load-misses/L1-dcache-loads". So "of all
>> L1-dcache hits" is unsuitable to describe it, and "of all L1-dcache
>> accesses" seems better. The comments of L1-icache, dTLB cache, iTLB
>> cache and LL-cache are fixed in the same way.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Qi Liu <liuqi115@hisilicon.com>
>> ---
>> tools/perf/util/stat-shadow.c | 30 ++++++++++++++++++++----------
>> 1 file changed, 20 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/tools/perf/util/stat-shadow.c b/tools/perf/util/stat-shadow.c
>> index 2c41d47..a3bdf2b 100644
>> --- a/tools/perf/util/stat-shadow.c
>> +++ b/tools/perf/util/stat-shadow.c
>> @@ -506,7 +506,8 @@ static void print_l1_dcache_misses(struct perf_stat_config *config,
>>
>> color = get_ratio_color(GRC_CACHE_MISSES, ratio);
>>
>> - out->print_metric(config, out->ctx, color, "%7.2f%%", "of all L1-dcache hits", ratio);
>> + out->print_metric(config, out->ctx, color, "%7.2f%%",
>> + "of all L1-dcache accesses", ratio);
>
>
> Why have you reflowed all those lines? This patch should have been like:
>
> - out->print_metric(config, out->ctx, color, "%7.2f%%", "of all L1-dcache hits", ratio);
> + out->print_metric(config, out->ctx, color, "%7.2f%%", "of all L1-dcache accesses", ratio);
>
> Notice how it is easier to compare the changes, and also to keep the
> flowing like it was before your change,
>
> Thanks,
>
> - Arnaldo
>
>> }
>>
>> static void print_l1_icache_misses(struct perf_stat_config *config,
>> @@ -527,7 +528,8 @@ static void print_l1_icache_misses(struct perf_stat_config *config,
>> ratio = avg / total * 100.0;
>>
>> color = get_ratio_color(GRC_CACHE_MISSES, ratio);
>> - out->print_metric(config, out->ctx, color, "%7.2f%%", "of all L1-icache hits", ratio);
>> + out->print_metric(config, out->ctx, color, "%7.2f%%",
>> + "of all L1-icache accesses", ratio);
>> }
>>
>> static void print_dtlb_cache_misses(struct perf_stat_config *config,
>> @@ -547,7 +549,8 @@ static void print_dtlb_cache_misses(struct perf_stat_config *config,
>> ratio = avg / total * 100.0;
>>
>> color = get_ratio_color(GRC_CACHE_MISSES, ratio);
>> - out->print_metric(config, out->ctx, color, "%7.2f%%", "of all dTLB cache hits", ratio);
>> + out->print_metric(config, out->ctx, color, "%7.2f%%",
>> + "of all dTLB cache accesses", ratio);
>> }
>>
>> static void print_itlb_cache_misses(struct perf_stat_config *config,
>> @@ -567,7 +570,8 @@ static void print_itlb_cache_misses(struct perf_stat_config *config,
>> ratio = avg / total * 100.0;
>>
>> color = get_ratio_color(GRC_CACHE_MISSES, ratio);
>> - out->print_metric(config, out->ctx, color, "%7.2f%%", "of all iTLB cache hits", ratio);
>> + out->print_metric(config, out->ctx, color, "%7.2f%%",
>> + "of all iTLB cache accesses", ratio);
>> }
>>
>> static void print_ll_cache_misses(struct perf_stat_config *config,
>> @@ -587,7 +591,8 @@ static void print_ll_cache_misses(struct perf_stat_config *config,
>> ratio = avg / total * 100.0;
>>
>> color = get_ratio_color(GRC_CACHE_MISSES, ratio);
>> - out->print_metric(config, out->ctx, color, "%7.2f%%", "of all LL-cache hits", ratio);
>> + out->print_metric(config, out->ctx, color, "%7.2f%%",
>> + "of all LL-cache accesses", ratio);
>> }
>>
>> /*
>> @@ -872,7 +877,8 @@ void perf_stat__print_shadow_stats(struct perf_stat_config *config,
>> if (runtime_stat_n(st, STAT_L1_DCACHE, ctx, cpu) != 0)
>> print_l1_dcache_misses(config, cpu, evsel, avg, out, st);
>> else
>> - print_metric(config, ctxp, NULL, NULL, "of all L1-dcache hits", 0);
>> + print_metric(config, ctxp, NULL, NULL,
>> + "of all L1-dcache accesses", 0);
>> } else if (
>> evsel->core.attr.type == PERF_TYPE_HW_CACHE &&
>> evsel->core.attr.config == ( PERF_COUNT_HW_CACHE_L1I |
>> @@ -882,7 +888,8 @@ void perf_stat__print_shadow_stats(struct perf_stat_config *config,
>> if (runtime_stat_n(st, STAT_L1_ICACHE, ctx, cpu) != 0)
>> print_l1_icache_misses(config, cpu, evsel, avg, out, st);
>> else
>> - print_metric(config, ctxp, NULL, NULL, "of all L1-icache hits", 0);
>> + print_metric(config, ctxp, NULL, NULL,
>> + "of all L1-icache accesses", 0);
>> } else if (
>> evsel->core.attr.type == PERF_TYPE_HW_CACHE &&
>> evsel->core.attr.config == ( PERF_COUNT_HW_CACHE_DTLB |
>> @@ -892,7 +899,8 @@ void perf_stat__print_shadow_stats(struct perf_stat_config *config,
>> if (runtime_stat_n(st, STAT_DTLB_CACHE, ctx, cpu) != 0)
>> print_dtlb_cache_misses(config, cpu, evsel, avg, out, st);
>> else
>> - print_metric(config, ctxp, NULL, NULL, "of all dTLB cache hits", 0);
>> + print_metric(config, ctxp, NULL, NULL,
>> + "of all dTLB cache accesses", 0);
>> } else if (
>> evsel->core.attr.type == PERF_TYPE_HW_CACHE &&
>> evsel->core.attr.config == ( PERF_COUNT_HW_CACHE_ITLB |
>> @@ -902,7 +910,8 @@ void perf_stat__print_shadow_stats(struct perf_stat_config *config,
>> if (runtime_stat_n(st, STAT_ITLB_CACHE, ctx, cpu) != 0)
>> print_itlb_cache_misses(config, cpu, evsel, avg, out, st);
>> else
>> - print_metric(config, ctxp, NULL, NULL, "of all iTLB cache hits", 0);
>> + print_metric(config, ctxp, NULL, NULL,
>> + "of all iTLB cache accesses", 0);
>> } else if (
>> evsel->core.attr.type == PERF_TYPE_HW_CACHE &&
>> evsel->core.attr.config == ( PERF_COUNT_HW_CACHE_LL |
>> @@ -912,7 +921,8 @@ void perf_stat__print_shadow_stats(struct perf_stat_config *config,
>> if (runtime_stat_n(st, STAT_LL_CACHE, ctx, cpu) != 0)
>> print_ll_cache_misses(config, cpu, evsel, avg, out, st);
>> else
>> - print_metric(config, ctxp, NULL, NULL, "of all LL-cache hits", 0);
>> + print_metric(config, ctxp, NULL, NULL,
>> + "of all LL-cache accesses", 0);
>> } else if (perf_evsel__match(evsel, HARDWARE, HW_CACHE_MISSES)) {
>> total = runtime_stat_avg(st, STAT_CACHEREFS, ctx, cpu);
>>
>> --
>> 2.8.1
>
prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-12-12 6:37 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-11-16 7:48 [PATCH] Perf stat: Fix the ratio comments of miss-events lqqq341
2019-11-16 14:45 ` Andi Kleen
2019-11-19 15:59 ` Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
2019-12-12 6:37 ` Qi Liu [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1f6d8522-10df-4a68-47f5-978afc827d80@huawei.com \
--to=liuqi115@huawei.com \
--cc=ak@linux.intel.com \
--cc=alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com \
--cc=arnaldo.melo@gmail.com \
--cc=huangdaode@hisilicon.com \
--cc=john.garry@huawei.com \
--cc=jolsa@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linuxarm@huawei.com \
--cc=linyunsheng@huawei.com \
--cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=namhyung@kernel.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=zhangshaokun@hisilicon.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).