Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1756265AbbHYUQF (ORCPT ); Tue, 25 Aug 2015 16:16:05 -0400 Received: from mga11.intel.com ([192.55.52.93]:6404 "EHLO mga11.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932103AbbHYUQB (ORCPT ); Tue, 25 Aug 2015 16:16:01 -0400 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.17,747,1437462000"; d="scan'208";a="775535984" From: "Liang, Kan" To: Stephane Eranian CC: Peter Zijlstra , "mingo@redhat.com" , Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo , "ak@linux.intel.com" , LKML Subject: RE: [PATCH V2 1/1] perf/x86: Add Intel power cstate PMUs support Thread-Topic: [PATCH V2 1/1] perf/x86: Add Intel power cstate PMUs support Thread-Index: AQHQyIV8gIooX1MBqECTD6kaMyULcJ3+pmIAgAAp4ICAAIlEYP//iUWAgB5jfRA= Date: Tue, 25 Aug 2015 20:15:45 +0000 Message-ID: <37D7C6CF3E00A74B8858931C1DB2F077018F2AD6@SHSMSX103.ccr.corp.intel.com> References: <1437986776-8438-1-git-send-email-kan.liang@intel.com> <20150806154424.GR19282@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> <37D7C6CF3E00A74B8858931C1DB2F077018D334D@SHSMSX103.ccr.corp.intel.com> In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: zh-CN, en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-originating-ip: [10.239.127.40] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from base64 to 8bit by mail.home.local id t7PKGAGV020550 Content-Length: 1700 Lines: 42 > >> > > >> I understand that these metrics are useful and needed however if I > >> look at the broader picture I see many PMUs doing similar things or > >> appearing different when they are actually very close. It would be > >> nice to have a more unified approach. You have RAPL (client, server) > >> which appears as the power PMU. You have the PCU uncore on servers > >> which also provides C-state residency info. Yet, all these appear > >> differently and expose events with different names. > >> I think we could benefit from a more unifie approach here such that > >> you would be able to do > >> > >> $ perf stat -a -e power/c6-residency/, power/energy-pkg/ > >> > >> on client and server without having to change the pmu name of the > >> event names. > > > > Yes, I agree. I'll think about it. > > Hi Stephane, I thought more about your suggestion regarding to create a unified power PMU for all related events include RAPL and residency. It looks we can benefit from a simple unified name, but it also brings too much confusion. - cstate residency is the time of the core/socket in specific cstate. While RAPL event is the power core/socket which consumed. They have different concepts. - cstate residency includes both per-core and per-socket events. RAPL events is only per-socket. So the CPU mask is different. It's very confused that the events in same PMU has different CPU mask. So I think it should be better to use different PMUs for RAPL and residency. What do you think? Thanks, Kan ????{.n?+???????+%?????ݶ??w??{.n?+????{??G?????{ay?ʇڙ?,j??f???h?????????z_??(?階?ݢj"???m??????G????????????&???~???iO???z??v?^?m???? ????????I?