From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.9 required=3.0 tests=DKIMWL_WL_HIGH,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2B5CCC28CBC for ; Sun, 3 May 2020 22:17:06 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EF90F20661 for ; Sun, 3 May 2020 22:17:05 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=redhat.com header.i=@redhat.com header.b="QLfVknvN" Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1729187AbgECWRF (ORCPT ); Sun, 3 May 2020 18:17:05 -0400 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-1.mimecast.com ([205.139.110.120]:33103 "EHLO us-smtp-1.mimecast.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1729130AbgECWRE (ORCPT ); Sun, 3 May 2020 18:17:04 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1588544222; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=IzMteexphnfVBLZuai2Wph1FRJdHOj+7yHhCXzBH70A=; b=QLfVknvNiI8nNva8FrbNFPYZIJNMYlJR8QDhBjsAIVXlF+8bdk1IKGyeEk7DVlckzgHlkD t7wbFzgjgE2nqs1hNnUWGP93sFuJ4eV+2BzS1k6Uyr464WNzYzYS8EuzcvnCJ9jTYiC0DE 5csii8o8QEm2F67YIhx6KljoDy5I6Ns= Received: from mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (mimecast-mx01.redhat.com [209.132.183.4]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-458-0BzSlvLmOHCIcu7nPzE12w-1; Sun, 03 May 2020 18:17:01 -0400 X-MC-Unique: 0BzSlvLmOHCIcu7nPzE12w-1 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx01.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.11]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5EE1E80B713; Sun, 3 May 2020 22:16:58 +0000 (UTC) Received: from krava (unknown [10.40.192.50]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 179F36137D; Sun, 3 May 2020 22:16:52 +0000 (UTC) Date: Mon, 4 May 2020 00:16:50 +0200 From: Jiri Olsa To: Ian Rogers Cc: Peter Zijlstra , Ingo Molnar , Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo , Mark Rutland , Alexander Shishkin , Namhyung Kim , Kan Liang , Andi Kleen , Haiyan Song , Jin Yao , Song Liu , Ravi Bangoria , John Garry , Leo Yan , Adrian Hunter , Paul Clarke , LKML , kajoljain , linux-perf-users , Stephane Eranian Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 12/12] perf test: improve pmu event metric testing Message-ID: <20200503221650.GA1916255@krava> References: <20200501173333.227162-1-irogers@google.com> <20200501173333.227162-13-irogers@google.com> <20200503145553.GA1865281@krava> <20200503170608.GA1915271@krava> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.79 on 10.5.11.11 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sun, May 03, 2020 at 10:31:37AM -0700, Ian Rogers wrote: SNIP > > > > > > This looks like a bug in skl-metrics.json: > > > > > > { > > > "BriefDescription": "Average number of parallel data read > > > requests to external memory. Accounts for demand loads and L1/L2 > > > prefetches", > > > "MetricExpr": "arb@event\\=0x80\\,umask\\=0x2@ / > > > arb@event\\=0x80\\,umask\\=0x2\\,thresh\\=1@", > > > "MetricGroup": "Memory_BW", > > > "MetricName": "DRAM_Parallel_Reads" > > > }, > > > > > > which can be fixed by removing "\\,thresh\\=1" but looking at the > > > expression this will just make the expression yield a value of 1. As > > > this is an Intel json file could they comment? Jiri, could you be > > > missing a patch on the kernel side? We could lower this failure to > > > just a diagnostic message to land this set of patches, let me know > > > what you'd like me to do. > > > > I applied this on current Arnaldo's perf/core.. not sure there's > > more pending changes out there > > > > I'd like not to delay this patchset too long.. could we push the > > first 10 patches and solve the rest in separate change? > > Thanks, I've attached a patch that can be squashed into 12 to make the > error non-fatal. Patch 11 is trying to make the diagnostics around > adding a PMU event clearer and aside warning messages, and removal of, > has no functional effect. I don't mind the first 10 being merged and > these coming later. I don't mind just patch 11 coming later as it'd be > nice to have the test so metrics can get fixed. sounds good, for patches 1 - 10: Acked-by: Jiri Olsa thanks, jirka