From: Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com>
To: Ian Rogers <irogers@google.com>
Cc: Namhyung Kim <namhyung@kernel.org>, linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v9 3/4] perf script: Fix perf script -F +metric
Date: Thu, 8 Aug 2024 13:18:17 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ZrUoCRu4HGoROUs2@tassilo> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAP-5=fVZ0_orgpLcG492WtjW05QWu2Mbnuv=_NKweouVXq2icA@mail.gmail.com>
>
> Fwiw, not acked-by me. Repeating my comments below:
Let me just point out that you broke it in the first place.
A little more enthusiasm in handling regressions would be appreciated.
> > > diff --git a/tools/perf/builtin-script.c b/tools/perf/builtin-script.c
> > > index c16224b1fef3..cb63507af839 100644
> > > --- a/tools/perf/builtin-script.c
> > > +++ b/tools/perf/builtin-script.c
> > > @@ -335,7 +335,6 @@ struct evsel_script {
> > > FILE *fp;
> > > u64 samples;
> > > /* For metric output */
> > > - u64 val;
> > > int gnum;
>
> We're globally assuming properties of events assuming leader sampling.
> gnum shouldn't exist. The assumptions will be invalid when leader
> sampling isn't enabled.
This is checked for now, see the earlier discussion.
> > > + if (!(leader->core.attr.read_format & PERF_FORMAT_GROUP) ||
> > > + !(leader->core.attr.sample_type & PERF_SAMPLE_READ)) {
> > > + if (!printed)
> > > + fprintf(stderr, "perf script: -F metric requires {}:S for groups leader sampling\n");
> > > + printed = 1;
> > > + return;
> > > + }
> > > + /*
> > > + * Always use the first entry as storage because the leader sampling
> > > + * groups are contiguous and there's no need to handle multiple indexes
> > > + * for anything.
> > > + */
> > > + evsel->stats->aggr[0].counts.val = val;
>
> Updating counts needs perf_stat_process_counter to update the
> aggregation. How does sample->cpu given below relate to aggr[0] here?
> This and the comment above are a hack liable to break in anything but
> straightforward circumstances. See:
> https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20240720074552.1915993-2-irogers@google.com/
> on how to handle this.
Your patch is based on a fundamental misunderstanding on the perf script
metrics use model, see below.
>
> > > if (evsel_script(leader)->gnum == leader->core.nr_members) {
> > > for_each_group_member (ev2, leader) {
> > > perf_stat__print_shadow_stats(&stat_config, ev2,
> > > - evsel_script(ev2)->val,
> > > - sample->cpu,
> > > + evsel->stats->aggr[0].counts.val,
> > > + 0,
>
> Similarly this hard coded and unexplained constant.
There's a comment just on top of it explaining it:
/*
* Always use the first entry as storage because the leader sampling
* groups are contiguous and there's no need to handle multiple indexes
* for anything.
*/
>
> > > &ctx,
> > > NULL);
> > > }
> > > @@ -2325,6 +2337,20 @@ static void process_event(struct perf_script *script,
> > > fflush(fp);
> > > }
> > >
> > > +static void check_metric_conflict(void)
> > > +{
> > > + int i;
> > > + /*
> > > + * Avoid conflict with the aggregation mode used for the metric printing.
> > > + */
>
> Why is it a conflict, why not support aggregation modes?
I thought I had explained that before.
perf script has two touch point with perf stat output code: one is this one
(for metrics on sampling group) and the other is for perf stat record / script
None of them actually support aggregation because perf script as a
general rule doesn't aggregate, it only handles single events.
But the later one forces AGGR_NONE which doesn't work with the mode the group
output uses.
This feature is only to report the metric state for a single sampling period
and group as explained in the original commit [1]
If you want to aggregate multiple sample periods you need a lot the
machinery from perf report, which doesn't make sense to duplicate
in perf script.
[1] https://www.uwsg.indiana.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/1712.0/04705.html
-Andi
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2024-08-08 20:18 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2024-08-07 23:18 [PATCH v9 1/4] Create source symlink in perf object dir Andi Kleen
2024-08-07 23:18 ` [PATCH v9 2/4] perf test: Support external tests for separate objdir Andi Kleen
2024-08-07 23:18 ` [PATCH v9 3/4] perf script: Fix perf script -F +metric Andi Kleen
2024-08-08 5:18 ` Namhyung Kim
2024-08-08 18:09 ` Ian Rogers
2024-08-08 20:18 ` Andi Kleen [this message]
2024-08-09 15:00 ` Ian Rogers
2024-08-07 23:18 ` [PATCH v9 4/4] Add a test case for " Andi Kleen
2024-11-25 17:25 ` [PATCH v9 1/4] Create source symlink in perf object dir Luca Ceresoli
2024-11-25 19:12 ` Andi Kleen
2024-11-26 7:34 ` Luca Ceresoli
2025-04-09 17:43 ` Florian Fainelli
2025-04-09 17:59 ` Florian Fainelli
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=ZrUoCRu4HGoROUs2@tassilo \
--to=ak@linux.intel.com \
--cc=irogers@google.com \
--cc=linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=namhyung@kernel.org \
/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).