Messages in this thread Patch in this message | | | Subject | Re: Issue of metrics for multiple uncore PMUs (was Re: [RFC PATCH v2 23/23] perf metricgroup: remove duped metric group events) | From | John Garry <> | Date | Mon, 5 Oct 2020 11:03:36 +0100 |
| |
On 02/10/2020 21:46, Ian Rogers wrote: > On Fri, Oct 2, 2020 at 5:00 AM John Garry <john.garry@huawei.com> wrote: >> >> On 07/05/2020 15:08, Ian Rogers wrote: >> >> Hi Ian, >> >> I was wondering if you ever tested commit 2440689d62e9 ("perf >> metricgroup: Remove duped metric group events") for when we have a >> metric which aliases multiple instances of the same uncore PMU in the >> system? > > Sorry for this, I hadn't tested such a metric and wasn't aware of how > the aliasing worked. I sent a fix for this issue here: > https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20200917201807.4090224-1-irogers@google.com/ > Could you see if this addresses the issue for you? I don't see the > change in Arnaldo's trees yet.
Unfortunately this does not seem to fix my issue.
So for that patch, you say you fix metric expression for DRAM_BW_Use, which is:
{ "BriefDescription": "Average external Memory Bandwidth Use for reads and writes [GB / sec]", "MetricExpr": "( 64 * ( uncore_imc@cas_count_read@ + uncore_imc@cas_count_write@ ) / 1000000000 ) / duration_time", "MetricGroup": "Memory_BW", "MetricName": "DRAM_BW_Use" },
But this metric expression does not include any alias events; rather I think it is just cas_count_write + cas_count_read event count for PMU uncore_imc / duration_time.
When I say alias, I mean - as an example, we have event:
{ "BriefDescription": "write requests to memory controller. Derived from unc_m_cas_count.wr", "Counter": "0,1,2,3", "EventCode": "0x4", "EventName": "LLC_MISSES.MEM_WRITE", "PerPkg": "1", "ScaleUnit": "64Bytes", "UMask": "0xC", "Unit": "iMC" },
And then reference LLC_MISSES.MEM_WRITE in a metric expression:
"MetricExpr": "LLC_MISSES.MEM_WRITE / duration_time",
This is what seems to be broken for when the alias matches > 1 PMU.
Please check this.
Thanks, John
> > Thanks, > Ian > >> I have been rebasing some of my arm64 perf work to v5.9-rc7, and find an >> issue where find_evsel_group() fails for the uncore metrics under the >> condition mentioned above. >> >> Unfortunately I don't have an x86 machine to which this test applies. >> However, as an experiment, I added a test metric to my broadwell JSON: >> >> diff --git a/tools/perf/pmu-events/arch/x86/broadwell/bdw-metrics.json >> b/tools/perf/pmu-events/arch/x86/broadwell/bdw-metrics.json >> index 8cdc7c13dc2a..fc6d9adf996a 100644 >> --- a/tools/perf/pmu-events/arch/x86/broadwell/bdw-metrics.json >> +++ b/tools/perf/pmu-events/arch/x86/broadwell/bdw-metrics.json >> @@ -348,5 +348,11 @@ >> "MetricExpr": "(cstate_pkg@c7\\-residency@ / msr@tsc@) * 100", >> "MetricGroup": "Power", >> "MetricName": "C7_Pkg_Residency" >> + }, >> + { >> + "BriefDescription": "test metric", >> + "MetricExpr": "UNC_CBO_XSNP_RESPONSE.MISS_XCORE * >> UNC_CBO_XSNP_RESPONSE.MISS_EVICTION", >> + "MetricGroup": "Test", >> + "MetricName": "test_metric_inc" >> } >> ] >> >> >> And get this: >> >> john@localhost:~/linux/tools/perf> sudo ./perf stat -v -M >> test_metric_inc sleep 1 >> Using CPUID GenuineIntel-6-3D-4 >> metric expr unc_cbo_xsnp_response.miss_xcore * >> unc_cbo_xsnp_response.miss_eviction for test_metric_inc >> found event unc_cbo_xsnp_response.miss_eviction >> found event unc_cbo_xsnp_response.miss_xcore >> adding >> {unc_cbo_xsnp_response.miss_eviction,unc_cbo_xsnp_response.miss_xcore}:W >> unc_cbo_xsnp_response.miss_eviction -> uncore_cbox_1/umask=0x81,event=0x22/ >> unc_cbo_xsnp_response.miss_eviction -> uncore_cbox_0/umask=0x81,event=0x22/ >> unc_cbo_xsnp_response.miss_xcore -> uncore_cbox_1/umask=0x41,event=0x22/ >> unc_cbo_xsnp_response.miss_xcore -> uncore_cbox_0/umask=0x41,event=0x22/ >> Cannot resolve test_metric_inc: unc_cbo_xsnp_response.miss_xcore * >> unc_cbo_xsnp_response.miss_eviction >> task-clock: 688876 688876 688876 >> context-switches: 2 688876 688876 >> cpu-migrations: 0 688876 688876 >> page-faults: 69 688876 688876 >> cycles: 2101719 695690 695690 >> instructions: 1180534 695690 695690 >> branches: 249450 695690 695690 >> branch-misses: 10815 695690 695690 >> >> Performance counter stats for 'sleep 1': >> >> 0.69 msec task-clock # 0.001 CPUs >> utilized >> 2 context-switches # 0.003 M/sec >> >> 0 cpu-migrations # 0.000 K/sec >> >> 69 page-faults # 0.100 M/sec >> >> 2,101,719 cycles # 3.051 GHz >> >> 1,180,534 instructions # 0.56 insn per >> cycle >> 249,450 branches # 362.112 M/sec >> >> 10,815 branch-misses # 4.34% of all >> branches >> >> 1.001177693 seconds time elapsed >> >> 0.001149000 seconds user >> 0.000000000 seconds sys >> >> >> john@localhost:~/linux/tools/perf> >> >> >> Any idea what is going wrong here, before I have to dive in? The issue >> seems to be this named commit. >> >> Thanks, >> John >> >>> A metric group contains multiple metrics. These metrics may use the same >>> events. If metrics use separate events then it leads to more >>> multiplexing and overall metric counts fail to sum to 100%. >>> Modify how metrics are associated with events so that if the events in >>> an earlier group satisfy the current metric, the same events are used. >>> A record of used events is kept and at the end of processing unnecessary >>> events are eliminated. >>> >>> Before: > . >
| |