From: Namhyung Kim <namhyung@kernel.org>
To: Chun-Tse Shao <ctshao@google.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@kernel.org>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com>,
Jiri Olsa <jolsa@kernel.org>, Ian Rogers <irogers@google.com>,
Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@intel.com>,
James Clark <james.clark@linaro.org>,
linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4] perf stat: Include PMU name and split uncore events per PMU in metric-only JSON output
Date: Thu, 6 Aug 2026 09:16:22 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <anSzVrjS14v2B3Im@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20260804210659.112192-1-ctshao@google.com>
Hello,
On Tue, Aug 04, 2026 at 02:06:59PM -0700, Chun-Tse Shao wrote:
> When running `perf stat` with `-A` (--no-aggr) and `--metric-only` in
> JSON output mode (`-j`), `perf stat` evaluates metric expressions
> across all matching PMUs (including uncore PMUs like `uncore_iio_0`,
> `uncore_iio_1`, etc.).
>
> However, `perf stat` previously formatted JSON output by printing only
> "cpu" : "<id>" and grouping all metric values on a single line per CPU
> without identifying which PMU instance evaluated each metric. As a
> result, when an uncore event spans multiple PMU boxes, `perf stat`
> printed repeated, ambiguous metric keys without PMU names.
>
> Fix this by:
> 1. Including "pmu" : "<pmu_name>" in print_aggr_id_json when evsel->pmu
> is a non-core or hybrid PMU in AGGR_NONE mode (-A).
> 2. Starting a new JSON metric line in AGGR_NONE mode (-A) whenever the
> underlying hardware PMU instance changes across PMU events.
> 3. Bypassing line initialization for tool events (e.g. -e user_time) in
> metric-only mode so that JSON lines are opened only by hardware PMUs,
> preventing tool events from corrupting PMU name labels or creating
> spurious empty {"pmu": "tool"} JSON objects.
> 4. Updating perf_json_output_lint.py to recognize the new "pmu" key in
> the JSON test suite.
>
> Before the fix:
> $ perf stat -M iio_bandwidth_read -a -A --metric-only -j -I 1000
> {"interval" : 1.001017947, "cpu" : "0", "MB/s iio_bandwidth_read" : "0.0", "MB/s iio_bandwidth_read" : "0.0", "MB/s iio_bandwidth_read" : "22.5", "MB/s iio_bandwidth_read" : "0.0", "MB/s iio_bandwidth_read" : "0.2", "MB/s iio_bandwidth_read" : "0.0", "MB/s iio_bandwidth_read" : "0.0", "MB/s iio_bandwidth_read" : "0.0", "MB/s iio_bandwidth_read" : "0.0", "MB/s iio_bandwidth_read" : "0.0"}
>
> There is no way to determine which uncore device generated the metrics.
>
> After:
> $ perf stat -M iio_bandwidth_read -a -A --metric-only -j -I 1000
> {"interval" : 1.000314908, "cpu" : "0", "pmu" : "uncore_iio_0", "MB/s iio_bandwidth_read" : "0.0"}
> {"interval" : 1.000314908, "cpu" : "0", "pmu" : "uncore_iio_1", "MB/s iio_bandwidth_read" : "0.1"}
> {"interval" : 1.000314908, "cpu" : "0", "pmu" : "uncore_iio_11", "MB/s iio_bandwidth_read" : "0.0"}
> ...
> {"interval" : 1.000314908, "cpu" : "56", "pmu" : "uncore_iio_0", "MB/s iio_bandwidth_read" : "0.0"}
> {"interval" : 1.000314908, "cpu" : "56", "pmu" : "uncore_iio_1", "MB/s iio_bandwidth_read" : "0.0"}
> {"interval" : 1.000314908, "cpu" : "56", "pmu" : "uncore_iio_11", "MB/s iio_bandwidth_read" : "0.0"}
Can you please fix perf stat JSON output linter test?
---- start ----
...
Checking json output: system wide no aggregation Test failed for input:
{"cpu" : "0", "pmu" : "software", "counter-value" : "3.000000", "unit" : "", "event" : "context-switches", "event-runtime" : 6269136, "pcnt-running" : 100.00, "metric-value" : "478.743700", "metric-unit" : "cs/sec cs_per_second"}
...
check_json_output(expected_items)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
File "linux/tools/perf/tests/shell/lib/perf_json_output_lint.py", line 89, in check_json_output
raise RuntimeError(f'wrong number of fields. counted {count} expected {expected_items}'
f' in \'{item}\'')
RuntimeError: wrong number of fields. counted 9 expected [6, 8] in '{'cpu': '0', 'pmu': 'software', 'counter-value': '3.000000', 'unit': '', 'event': 'context-switches', 'event-runtime': 6269136, 'pcnt-running': 100.0, 'metric-value': '478.743700', 'metric-unit': 'cs/sec cs_per_second'}'
---- end(-1) ----
119: perf stat JSON output linter : FAILED!
Thanks,
Namhyung
prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-08-06 16:16 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-08-04 21:06 [PATCH v4] perf stat: Include PMU name and split uncore events per PMU in metric-only JSON output Chun-Tse Shao
2026-08-06 16:16 ` Namhyung Kim [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=anSzVrjS14v2B3Im@google.com \
--to=namhyung@kernel.org \
--cc=acme@kernel.org \
--cc=adrian.hunter@intel.com \
--cc=alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com \
--cc=ctshao@google.com \
--cc=irogers@google.com \
--cc=james.clark@linaro.org \
--cc=jolsa@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.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