public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Liang, Kan" <kan.liang@linux.intel.com>
To: Namhyung Kim <namhyung@kernel.org>, James Clark <james.clark@linaro.org>
Cc: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@kernel.org>,
	Ian Rogers <irogers@google.com>, Jiri Olsa <jolsa@kernel.org>,
	Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@intel.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org,
	Ravi Bangoria <ravi.bangoria@amd.com>,
	Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
	James Clark <james.clark@arm.com>,
	Kajol Jain <kjain@linux.ibm.com>,
	Thomas Richter <tmricht@linux.ibm.com>,
	Atish Patra <atishp@atishpatra.org>,
	Palmer Dabbelt <palmer@rivosinc.com>,
	Mingwei Zhang <mizhang@google.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 04/10] perf stat: Add --exclude-guest option
Date: Wed, 25 Sep 2024 09:49:14 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <01c8dcaa-d557-407e-9ef3-babf90eb37d3@linux.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <ZvMfVe1VXwhCIOB9@google.com>



On 2024-09-24 4:21 p.m., Namhyung Kim wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 23, 2024 at 09:47:17AM +0100, James Clark wrote:
>>
>> On 06/09/2024 3:33 pm, Liang, Kan wrote:
>>>
>>> On 2024-09-05 4:24 p.m., Namhyung Kim wrote:
>>>> This option is to support the old behavior of setting exclude_guest by
>>>> default.  Now it doesn't set the bit so users want the old behavior can
>>>> use this option.
>>>>
>>>>    $ perf stat true
>>>>
>>>>     Performance counter stats for 'true':
>>>>
>>>>                  0.86 msec task-clock:u                     #    0.443 CPUs utilized
>>>>                     0      context-switches:u               #    0.000 /sec
>>>>                     0      cpu-migrations:u                 #    0.000 /sec
>>>>                    49      page-faults:u                    #   56.889 K/sec
>>>>                   ...
>>>>
>>>>    $ perf stat --exclude-guest true
>>>>
>>>>     Performance counter stats for 'true':
>>>>
>>>>                  0.79 msec task-clock:Hu                    #    0.490 CPUs utilized
>>>>                     0      context-switches:Hu              #    0.000 /sec
>>>>                     0      cpu-migrations:Hu                #    0.000 /sec
>>>>                    49      page-faults:Hu                   #   62.078 K/sec
>>>>                   ...
>>>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Namhyung Kim <namhyung@kernel.org>
>>>> ---
>>>>   tools/perf/Documentation/perf-stat.txt | 7 +++++++
>>>>   tools/perf/builtin-stat.c              | 2 ++
>>>>   2 files changed, 9 insertions(+)
>>>>
>>>> diff --git a/tools/perf/Documentation/perf-stat.txt b/tools/perf/Documentation/perf-stat.txt
>>>> index 2bc06367248691dd..d28d8370a856598f 100644
>>>> --- a/tools/perf/Documentation/perf-stat.txt
>>>> +++ b/tools/perf/Documentation/perf-stat.txt
>>>> @@ -382,6 +382,13 @@ color the metric's computed value.
>>>>   Don't print output, warnings or messages. This is useful with perf stat
>>>>   record below to only write data to the perf.data file.
>>>> +--exclude-guest::
>>>> +Don't count event in the guest mode.  It was the old behavior but the
>>>> +default is changed to count guest events also.  Use this option if you
>>>> +want the old behavior (host only).  Note that this option needs to be
>>>> +before other events in case you added -e/--event option in the command
>>>> +line.
>>> I'm not sure if we really need this option. I think it may bring more
>>> trouble than what we get.
>>>
>>> The name of the "--exclude-guest" sounds like a replacement of the event
>>> modifier "H". But in fact, it's not. It should only affect the default.
>>> It doesn't set the "H" for any events.
> Well I think it's tricky but it'd set "H" modifier events after the
> option.  But I have to agree that it can bring more troubles.

I may have miss-read something before. After some simple tests, yes, the
"H" is applied with the option.

Since there is a limit for the "--exclude-guest" option, can we print a
warning if the option becomes invalid because of the order?

> 
>>> Except for the perf kvm user, I don't think there are many users which
>>> care the exclude_guest. The behavior of the perf kvm is not changed. So
>>> the option seems not that important. If we really want an option to
>>> restore the old behavior, it's better to choose a better name and update
>>> the description.
> Personally I don't want to this option but just worried if there's a
> case where exclude_guest is preferred.

The only case I can imagine is that, with the new vPMU passthrough
introduced, some users may want to explicitly set the exclude_guest to
avoid the fallback. But I'm not sure how useful it is for them.

Thanks,
Kan

  parent reply	other threads:[~2024-09-25 13:49 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2024-09-05 20:24 [RFC/PATCHSET 00/10] perf tools: Do not set attr.exclude_guest by default (v3) Namhyung Kim
2024-09-05 20:24 ` [PATCH 01/10] perf tools: Add fallback for exclude_guest Namhyung Kim
2024-09-06 13:47   ` Liang, Kan
2024-09-30 20:36     ` Namhyung Kim
2024-09-05 20:24 ` [PATCH 02/10] perf tools: Don't set attr.exclude_guest by default Namhyung Kim
2024-09-06 14:10   ` Liang, Kan
2024-09-05 20:24 ` [PATCH 03/10] perf tools: Simplify evsel__add_modifier() Namhyung Kim
2024-09-05 20:24 ` [PATCH 04/10] perf stat: Add --exclude-guest option Namhyung Kim
2024-09-06 14:33   ` Liang, Kan
2024-09-23  8:47     ` James Clark
2024-09-24 20:21       ` Namhyung Kim
2024-09-25  8:36         ` James Clark
2024-09-30 20:13           ` Namhyung Kim
2024-09-25 13:49         ` Liang, Kan [this message]
2024-09-30 20:07           ` Namhyung Kim
2024-09-05 20:24 ` [PATCH 05/10] perf tools: Do not set exclude_guest for precise_ip Namhyung Kim
2024-09-05 20:24 ` [PATCH 06/10] perf tools: Detect missing kernel features properly Namhyung Kim
2024-09-05 20:24 ` [PATCH 07/10] perf tools: Separate exclude_hv fallback Namhyung Kim
2024-09-06 15:21   ` Liang, Kan
2024-09-30 20:37     ` Namhyung Kim
2024-09-05 20:24 ` [PATCH 08/10] perf tools: Move x86__is_amd_cpu() to util/env.c Namhyung Kim
2024-09-05 20:24 ` [PATCH 09/10] perf tools: Check fallback error and order Namhyung Kim
2024-09-05 20:24 ` [PATCH 10/10] perf record: Just use "cycles:P" as the default event Namhyung Kim

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=01c8dcaa-d557-407e-9ef3-babf90eb37d3@linux.intel.com \
    --to=kan.liang@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=acme@kernel.org \
    --cc=adrian.hunter@intel.com \
    --cc=atishp@atishpatra.org \
    --cc=irogers@google.com \
    --cc=james.clark@arm.com \
    --cc=james.clark@linaro.org \
    --cc=jolsa@kernel.org \
    --cc=kjain@linux.ibm.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
    --cc=mingo@kernel.org \
    --cc=mizhang@google.com \
    --cc=namhyung@kernel.org \
    --cc=palmer@rivosinc.com \
    --cc=peterz@infradead.org \
    --cc=ravi.bangoria@amd.com \
    --cc=tmricht@linux.ibm.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