[lkml]   [2022]   [Jan]   [5]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [RFC PATCH 1/1] perf arm64: Implement --topdown with metrics

On 17/12/2021 10:19, John Garry wrote:
> And there is no colouring for results which are above/below standard
> thresholds (see stat-shadow.c:get_radio_color()).
> My impression is that we're not plugging the results from
> metricgroup__parse_groups_to_evlist() into the --topdown print
> functionality properly.

The --topdown kernel event colouring is dictated by a large if-else
statement in stat-shadow.c:perf_stat__print_shadow_stats.

There are branches depending on what is returned by
perf_stat_evsel__is() for example

} else if (perf_stat_evsel__is(evsel, TOPDOWN_FETCH_BUBBLES)) {
double fe_bound = td_fe_bound(cpu, st, &rsd);

if (fe_bound > 0.2)
print_metric(config, ctxp, color, "%8.1f%%", "frontend bound",
fe_bound * 100.);
} else if (perf_stat_evsel__is(evsel, TOPDOWN_SLOTS_RETIRED)) {

Because the patches are enabling metrics (equivalent of the -M
'somemetricname' option), the perf_stat__print_shadow_stats function
always makes calls to generic_metric(), where colours are never picked.

Seeing thresholds like:

retiring > 0.7
fe_bound > 0.2
be_bound > 0.2
bad_spec > 0.1

I'm not sure about adding the colouring really. Are these thresholds
x86 specific?

> Thanks,
> John


 \ /
  Last update: 2022-01-05 18:01    [W:0.161 / U:0.104 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site