From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1754776AbbICMBl (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Thu, 3 Sep 2015 08:01:41 -0400
Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:55660 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com"
	rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
	id S1754235AbbICMBk (ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Thu, 3 Sep 2015 08:01:40 -0400
Date: Thu, 3 Sep 2015 14:01:33 +0200
From: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@redhat.com>
To: Stephane Eranian <eranian@google.com>
Cc: LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@redhat.com>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>, "mingo@elte.hu" <mingo@elte.hu>,
        "ak@linux.intel.com" <ak@linux.intel.com>,
        Namhyung Kim <namhyung@kernel.org>, "Liang, Kan" <kan.liang@intel.com>,
        David Ahern <dsahern@gmail.com>,
        Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] perf stat: fix per-pkg event reporting bug
Message-ID: <20150903120133.GF13114@krava.redhat.com>
References: <1441199871-7384-1-git-send-email-eranian@google.com>
 <20150903100134.GD13114@krava.redhat.com>
 <CABPqkBRsOyY4Zv4xMe6YKCjmkbq7RqZY4o=4H6evM7x_qRxiLw@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CABPqkBRsOyY4Zv4xMe6YKCjmkbq7RqZY4o=4H6evM7x_qRxiLw@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Thu, Sep 03, 2015 at 04:48:52AM -0700, Stephane Eranian wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 3, 2015 at 3:01 AM, Jiri Olsa <jolsa@redhat.com> wrote:
> > On Wed, Sep 02, 2015 at 03:17:51PM +0200, Stephane Eranian wrote:
> >
> > SNIP
> >
> >> +     /*
> >> +      * we do not consider an event that has not run as a good
> >> +      * instance to mark a package as used (skip=1). Otherwise
> >> +      * we may run into a situation where the first CPU in a package
> >> +      * is not running anything, yet the second is, and this function
> >> +      * would mark the package as used after the first CPU and would
> >> +      * not read the values from the second CPU.
> >> +      */
> >> +     if (!(vals->run && vals->ena))
> >> +             return 0;
> >> +
> >>       s = cpu_map__get_socket(cpus, cpu);
> >>       if (s < 0)
> >>               return -1;
> >> @@ -235,7 +247,7 @@ process_counter_values(struct perf_stat_config *config, struct perf_evsel *evsel
> >>       static struct perf_counts_values zero;
> >>       bool skip = false;
> >>
> >> -     if (check_per_pkg(evsel, cpu, &skip)) {
> >> +     if (check_per_pkg(evsel, aggr, cpu, &skip)) {
> >
> > should we pass 'count' instead o 'aggr' ?
> >
> the reason I passed counts_values is in case this function needs to be
> called from other places which do
> not use aggr mode.

sure, but 'aggr' is being computed within process_counter_values

process_counter_values gets 'count' argument with values read
for given cpu/thread for further processing, and it seems to
me that 'count' values should be passed to check_per_pkg

jirka