From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BFD83C0015E for ; Wed, 26 Jul 2023 15:08:10 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S234673AbjGZPIJ (ORCPT ); Wed, 26 Jul 2023 11:08:09 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:47288 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S234940AbjGZPID (ORCPT ); Wed, 26 Jul 2023 11:08:03 -0400 Received: from mga04.intel.com (mga04.intel.com [192.55.52.120]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6DC0F2D5A for ; Wed, 26 Jul 2023 08:07:38 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=intel.com; i=@intel.com; q=dns/txt; s=Intel; t=1690384058; x=1721920058; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references: mime-version:in-reply-to; bh=II/s8rkvCLJCb6Ut9xtsz/m47c0HcqLmfjOTkbQk31Y=; b=jhLy64Dibuqqxib+RNozu6AdRdJgfNqkf6I30ABBgV+Ptft8q7cvFJtW OjpHaHQPys+euL5//k6YGkw64NxDCa0LV15o89gp8PEJ6AwZsEJaSjlkA Kv1E0LT7/bONGCMnt/zGvu1/K8n8/oqGQnCCEP0X/dWlXXDlOB0/Sy+oh GCvo63xkexYkYZj/hPXS+fpesGVnrKwY7flLCCCSl44H4XVtCcbMlFVen 7l6iNq2vSJn+/Szip4OFJVWFf088SuAux0kDH9jdIdCB0nzlss8iwOh1U soIILTjWDLXBuNRx5z14C6v+Q4qboE0+I/FxMrYiG77AkaBLzdpl1Ygp9 Q==; X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6600,9927,10783"; a="366920953" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.01,232,1684825200"; d="scan'208";a="366920953" Received: from orsmga003.jf.intel.com ([10.7.209.27]) by fmsmga104.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 26 Jul 2023 08:05:48 -0700 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6600,9927,10783"; a="676745510" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.01,232,1684825200"; d="scan'208";a="676745510" Received: from tassilo.jf.intel.com (HELO tassilo) ([10.54.38.190]) by orsmga003-auth.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 26 Jul 2023 08:05:47 -0700 Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2023 08:05:46 -0700 From: Andi Kleen To: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo Cc: Ian Rogers , namhyung@kernel.org, linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Event reordering regression for software events Message-ID: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Jul 17, 2023 at 10:37:35AM -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote: > Don't we have a JSON output? My expectation is that after the work that > Ian has been doing we will settle down, but even then downstreamers > should try to use JSON as input as that would avoid the problems we are > having? In classic perf CSV was our machine readable output, and that is what got broken here. I hope nobody is advocating for abolishing CSV output as a machine readable format. For JSON it got broken too because of: > > I haven't tried to use it, but if you have something like > > perf stat --json -e '{cycles,branches},{cycles,cache-misses}' how would you > > distinguish it without order? > > You mentioned that it was difficult to add entries to 'perf test' but I can add some tests for basic reordering not occurring. That should be possible. > that we could try running toplev's regression test, right? I can add it > to my set of tests but perhaps the best thing would be to wire it up to > one of the CIs out there? Yes that would be a good idea. Note that there are sometimes problems which are on the toplev side, not perf side, but I guess can sort that out when that happens. -And