From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932153AbZISIBW (ORCPT ); Sat, 19 Sep 2009 04:01:22 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1755272AbZISIBV (ORCPT ); Sat, 19 Sep 2009 04:01:21 -0400 Received: from mx2.mail.elte.hu ([157.181.151.9]:34447 "EHLO mx2.mail.elte.hu" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755211AbZISIBV (ORCPT ); Sat, 19 Sep 2009 04:01:21 -0400 Date: Sat, 19 Sep 2009 10:01:14 +0200 From: Ingo Molnar To: sebastien cabaniols Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Peter Zijlstra Subject: Re: performance counter for linux question. Message-ID: <20090919080114.GA7676@elte.hu> References: <200909171428.23610.sebastien.cabaniols@hp.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200909171428.23610.sebastien.cabaniols@hp.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) X-ELTE-SpamScore: 0.5 X-ELTE-SpamLevel: X-ELTE-SpamCheck: no X-ELTE-SpamVersion: ELTE 2.0 X-ELTE-SpamCheck-Details: score=0.5 required=5.9 tests=BAYES_40 autolearn=no SpamAssassin version=3.2.5 0.5 BAYES_40 BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 20 to 40% [score: 0.2041] Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org * sebastien cabaniols wrote: > Hello list, > > I am interested by monitoring instructions versus cycles with a Nehalem box > using 2.6.31 with PCL. > > Is there a way with perf report to display both counters ? > > I used > > perf record -e cycles -e instructions -a for the recording session. > > perf report -n seems to be doing what I need but for only one counter. > > Is this a limitation of perf report ? > Is this an architectural limitation of PCL ? > Is there more documentation than what is in the perf directory in the 2.6.31 > tarball ? You can find a description and a tutorial here: http://lwn.net/Articles/339361/ There's also http://perf.wiki.kernel.org. Ingo