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 Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C4693C433F5 for ; Tue, 11 Oct 2022 00:25:33 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S229514AbiJKAZb (ORCPT ); Mon, 10 Oct 2022 20:25:31 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:33616 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229538AbiJKAZ1 (ORCPT ); Mon, 10 Oct 2022 20:25:27 -0400 Received: from mga04.intel.com (mga04.intel.com [192.55.52.120]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 37EFC1EAC5; Mon, 10 Oct 2022 17:25:26 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=intel.com; i=@intel.com; q=dns/txt; s=Intel; t=1665447926; x=1696983926; h=message-id:date:mime-version:subject:to:cc:references: from:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=Hi/39ZWjxqkQ6aMFAuB2tPrMoMeUZtt47pv6m/lcuTc=; b=EZYLV5DLC9HGFBldfehzuS6RixO4N7wfpg1RBo86LR+FW/FL0jdEyEig RzhNsBEG9vCKeZ3uEm2odNlmae4vvlqtZ1riwr5OxVxM9EBthXBkISIZd RK8rcMbQ5jfifSPn3UZTd9EyT7xCx51yCa+uKx35wEI4pE9KrZVpXiWo6 yyEJnZvgkudscRfcumF6lNELDPeKJNWO0FNnS8r8tOoN9QB1eIsoxGcIK 0DqI3pTILzkurENmGRfUiySnyv5RNJyS7uk0rz3pphHlwR7tYyRi4iRqn WjxNxHT9fGlfX7KxJJC07KTpd1f01sWdS2xr5njWTUy6axE/EBF0hv9tl A==; X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6500,9779,10496"; a="303106782" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.95,173,1661842800"; d="scan'208";a="303106782" Received: from fmsmga008.fm.intel.com ([10.253.24.58]) by fmsmga104.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 10 Oct 2022 17:25:26 -0700 X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6500,9779,10496"; a="689010780" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.95,173,1661842800"; d="scan'208";a="689010780" Received: from akleen-mobl1.amr.corp.intel.com (HELO [10.212.62.34]) ([10.212.62.34]) by fmsmga008-auth.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 10 Oct 2022 17:25:21 -0700 Message-ID: Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2022 20:25:16 -0400 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.3.2 Subject: Re: [RFC/PATCHSET 00/19] perf stat: Cleanup counter aggregation (v1) To: Namhyung Kim , Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo , Jiri Olsa Cc: Ingo Molnar , Peter Zijlstra , LKML , Ian Rogers , Adrian Hunter , linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org, Kan Liang , Leo Yan , Athira Rajeev , James Clark , Xing Zhengjun References: <20221010053600.272854-1-namhyung@kernel.org> Content-Language: en-US From: Andi Kleen In-Reply-To: <20221010053600.272854-1-namhyung@kernel.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 10/10/2022 10:35 PM, Namhyung Kim wrote: > Hello, > > Current perf stat code is somewhat hard to follow since it handles > many combinations of PMUs/events for given display and aggregation > options. This is my attempt to clean it up a little. ;-) My main concern would be subtle regressions since there are so many different combinations and way to travel through the code, and a lot of things are not covered by unit tests. When I worked on the code it was difficult to keep it all working. I assume you have some way to enumerate them all and tested that the output is identical? -Andi