From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: Stephane Eranian <eranian@google.com>
Cc: Lin Ming <ming.m.lin@intel.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>,
Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org>,
Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com>,
Arjan van de Ven <arjan@infradead.org>,
lkml <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, paulus <paulus@samba.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] perf: Add load latency monitoring on Intel Nehalem/Westmere
Date: Thu, 23 Dec 2010 12:37:50 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1293104270.2170.580.camel@laptop> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTi==HfPX1J7yRW=9nbDJfY7Bd4=kZhphq+SoU+-k@mail.gmail.com>
On Thu, 2010-12-23 at 12:05 +0100, Stephane Eranian wrote:
> > Value Intel Perf
> > 0x0 Unknown L3 Unknown
> >
> > 0x1 L1 L1-local
> >
> > 0x2 Pending core cache HIT L2-snoop
> > Outstanding core cache miss to
>
> Not clear how you know this is snoop or L2?
>
> I suspect this one is saying you have a request for a line
> for which there is already a pending request underway. Could
> be the first came from prefetchers, the 2nd is actual demand.
>
> Let me check with Intel. The table is unclear.
Right, so cache snoops as used by Intel are data transfer operations
(not only the watching for remote modifications and local invalidation
as per the strict definition), they typically short-circuit a complete
fetch, get it from a neighboring cache, or otherwise in-flight data.
Since this is a pending fetch, the data is in-flight, and snoop seemed
to apply, but I admit it is somewhat of a stretch.
The L2 came from the usage of "core cache", I might be wrong on that.
Anyway, its a bit of an odd one out, you can have the exact same
'problem' of pending fetches on the same line on all levels, yet they
don't provide this 'source' for other levels.
Strictly speaking, this is a stall, not a source, and we could simply
map it to 'unknown' and be done with it.
> > the same line was underway
> > 0x3 L2 L2-local
> >
> > 0x4 L3-snoop, no coherency actions L3-snoop-I
>
> I am not sure I understand what you mean by local vs. remote
> in your terminology.
Local being the cache nearest to the cpu, remote being all others.
Admittedly that doesn't really make too much sense for L[12], but
imagine threads having their own L1, then I could imagine a thread
trying to peek in a sibling's L1 since its so near. In that case it
would make sense to use local vs remote on the L1.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-12-23 11:37 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-12-22 8:12 [RFC PATCH] perf: Add load latency monitoring on Intel Nehalem/Westmere Lin Ming
2010-12-22 8:33 ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-12-22 8:47 ` Lin Ming
2010-12-22 9:04 ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-12-22 10:14 ` Ingo Molnar
2010-12-23 1:14 ` Lin Ming
2010-12-23 7:35 ` Andi Kleen
2010-12-22 9:00 ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-12-22 10:08 ` Stephane Eranian
2010-12-22 10:45 ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-12-22 10:49 ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-12-23 8:59 ` Lin Ming
2010-12-23 10:18 ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-12-23 10:31 ` Stephane Eranian
2010-12-23 10:48 ` Peter Zijlstra
2010-12-23 11:05 ` Stephane Eranian
2010-12-23 11:37 ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
2010-12-23 8:28 ` Lin Ming
2010-12-23 10:11 ` Peter Zijlstra
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=1293104270.2170.580.camel@laptop \
--to=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=andi@firstfloor.org \
--cc=arjan@infradead.org \
--cc=eranian@google.com \
--cc=fweisbec@gmail.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=ming.m.lin@intel.com \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=paulus@samba.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