Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 3 Nov 2021 08:32:14 -0300 | From | Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH v3] perf evsel: Fix missing exclude_{host,guest} setting |
| |
Em Wed, Nov 03, 2021 at 12:44:12AM -0700, Stephane Eranian escreveu: > On Wed, Nov 3, 2021 at 12:24 AM Jiri Olsa <jolsa@redhat.com> wrote: > > On Tue, Nov 02, 2021 at 04:21:21PM -0700, Namhyung Kim wrote: > > > On Tue, Nov 2, 2021 at 7:10 AM Jiri Olsa <jolsa@redhat.com> wrote: > > > > we were discussing this with Arnaldo yesterday and he had an idea to use > > > > evsel->pmu link to store this info instead of hash.. I first thought we > > > > needed 'evsel' related data, but after I gave it some thought I think that > > > > might actually work
> > > I don't get it.. do we have evsel->pmu already? Or do you want to add it? > > > Yeah, the filtering facility (attr.exclude_*) should be kept in a PMU data > > > not in the evsel. So I added a hashmap to find the pmu data from attr.type. > > > How do I use evsel->pmu to store the info then?
> > evsel->pmu is not there yet (only evsel->pmu_name) so that > > would need to be added.. we have evsel__find_pmu available
> > then the idea is to use evsel->pmu instead of the hasmap, > > like add:
> > struct pmu { > > ... > > bool missing_exclude_guest; > > };
yeah, or more generaly:
struct pmu { ... struct { bool exclude_guess; } missing_features; };
> > set it when the guest filtering fails and and check it > > instead of the hashmap__find call
> > > > my argument was following usecase:
> > > > cycles:G,instructions:G,pmu/bla1/:G,pmu/bla2/
> > > > that we would falsely clear pmu/bla1/:G if we used the 'evsel->pmu' data.. > > > > but then I realized it's detection if pmu support :G and so if the :G is > > > > not there, none of the events should have it
> > > > thoughts?
> > > I don't think I'm following well... ;-p
> > > If the pmu doesn't support host/guest filtering, pmu/bla1/G > > > may count something. Not sure if it's better to error out. > > > But the cycles:G and instructions:G should result in 0 > > > in case there's no VM running.
> > hm, I think if pmu doesn't support host/guest filtering then > > I think 'pmu/bla1/G' should error, no? better no number than > > bad number
> Yes, it should in my opinion.
Yeah, I thought about this yesterday (holiday here).
- Arnaldo
| |