From: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@redhat.com>
To: Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com>
Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
Stephane Eranian <eranian@google.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
"mingo@elte.hu" <mingo@elte.hu>, David Ahern <dsahern@gmail.com>,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@redhat.com>,
Namhyung Kim <namhyung.kim@lge.com>
Subject: Re: [BUG] perf stat: explicit grouping yields unexpected results
Date: Fri, 29 Nov 2013 14:33:40 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20131129133340.GA25751@krava.brq.redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20131117034134.GA19762@tassilo.jf.intel.com>
On Sat, Nov 16, 2013 at 07:41:34PM -0800, Andi Kleen wrote:
> > I'd say that the default behavior should be what Jiri implemented: get
> > the most out of the situation and inform. But you are right in that
> > 'forcing' all elements of a group to be valid should be possible as
> > well - if a special perf stat option or event format is used.
>
> When something is multiplexed it can have a very
> large measurement error. For workloads that fluctuate quite a bit, and the
> fluctuations do not line up well with the multiplexing interval,
> the default scaling does not give good results.
>
> So you expect to get good data, but you get very bad data.
>
> When collecting data for a large number of events it is important
> to group them correctly, so that events that are directly dependent
> on each other in equations are properly grouped.
>
> When explicit groups were added the user likely considered this
> problem, so it's not good to silently override the choices.
>
> If a user doesn't care they can always not use groups.
>
> > Even in that second case it shouldn't say <unsupported> for everything
> > in the result, but should deny the run immediately and return with an
> > error, and should tell the user how many events in the group fit and
> > which ones didn't.
>
> Returning this information would be great, but it would really
> need an extended errno, or just a error string reported out.
(sry for late reply, I was still ooo, and missed this conversation)
I agree, when the last event fails sys_perf_event_open
due to the validate_group check, we will get just EINVAL
Was there any discussion about the error (or erorr string)
propagation from sys_perf_event_open?
Something like below? user space supply buffer for error string.
jirka
---
diff --git a/include/uapi/linux/perf_event.h b/include/uapi/linux/perf_event.h
index e1802d6..a827870 100644
--- a/include/uapi/linux/perf_event.h
+++ b/include/uapi/linux/perf_event.h
@@ -331,8 +331,8 @@ struct perf_event_attr {
*/
__u32 sample_stack_user;
- /* Align to u64. */
- __u32 __reserved_2;
+ __u32 errstr_size;
+ char *errstr;
};
#define perf_flags(attr) (*(&(attr)->read_format + 1))
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-11-29 13:34 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 21+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-11-14 20:50 [BUG] perf stat: explicit grouping yields unexpected results Stephane Eranian
2013-11-15 6:34 ` Ingo Molnar
2013-11-15 9:24 ` Stephane Eranian
2013-11-15 10:34 ` Ingo Molnar
2013-11-15 10:41 ` Stephane Eranian
2013-11-15 10:50 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-11-15 11:52 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-11-15 11:58 ` Stephane Eranian
2013-11-17 3:41 ` Andi Kleen
2013-11-29 13:33 ` Jiri Olsa [this message]
2013-11-29 13:43 ` Stephane Eranian
2013-11-29 13:52 ` Jiri Olsa
2013-11-29 14:01 ` Stephane Eranian
2013-12-02 15:23 ` Andi Kleen
2013-12-03 2:52 ` Stephane Eranian
2013-12-03 23:44 ` Andi Kleen
2013-11-15 10:05 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-11-15 10:13 ` Stephane Eranian
2013-11-15 10:49 ` Peter Zijlstra
2013-11-15 15:08 ` Vince Weaver
2013-11-15 22:52 ` Stephane Eranian
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=20131129133340.GA25751@krava.brq.redhat.com \
--to=jolsa@redhat.com \
--cc=acme@redhat.com \
--cc=ak@linux.intel.com \
--cc=dsahern@gmail.com \
--cc=eranian@google.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@elte.hu \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=namhyung.kim@lge.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