Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 23.128.96.18 as permitted sender) client-ip=23.128.96.18;
IronPort-SDR: 0cgLrLvhckE8o2UJXDN5A5ghXY9ickVM7ocYPbTXZQangKakgBHZdzosYkOAN4R+pWuIsyd8QO
 9cZ8QXJ1uRNw==
IronPort-SDR: PjIg4TSDLs4JDfbmYwRiX32i3K5dTo4h0kERzOIc8Uic5v20hGW2Ulpvp5V5uc6uoYL5Q1ghwH
 a9Nuy3E5R7eA==
Subject: Re: [PATCH 6/9] perf report: Support instruction latency
To:     Athira Rajeev <atrajeev@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Cc:     Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@kernel.org>, mingo@kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>, eranian@google.com,
        namhyung@kernel.org, jolsa@redhat.com, ak@linux.intel.com,
        yao.jin@linux.intel.com, maddy@linux.vnet.ibm.com
References: <1612296553-21962-1-git-send-email-kan.liang@linux.intel.com>
 <1612296553-21962-7-git-send-email-kan.liang@linux.intel.com>
 <A90940CE-3DFB-4774-BA46-0C5FEB4953A0@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
 <27633871-eda5-7faa-8783-84dd49f8a6cd@linux.intel.com>
 <6F377E9D-89F8-414F-A2CC-C96797697159@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
From:   "Liang, Kan" <kan.liang@linux.intel.com>
Message-ID: <2f2ede9e-b098-4921-59e2-1289bdc87ba1@linux.intel.com>
Date:   Fri, 5 Feb 2021 09:51:24 -0500
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/78.7.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <6F377E9D-89F8-414F-A2CC-C96797697159@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Language: en-US
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Precedence: bulk


On 2/5/2021 7:55 AM, Athira Rajeev wrote:
>>> Because in other archs, the var2_w of ‘perf_sample_weight’ could be used to capture something else than the Local INSTR Latency.
>>> Can we have some weak function to populate the header string ?
>> I agree that the var2_w has different meanings among architectures. We should not force it to data->ins_lat.
>>
>> The patch as below should fix it. Does it work for you?
> My point about weak function was actually for the arch specific header string. But I guess we should not force it to data->ins_lat

Yes, I don't think PowerPC should force var2_w to data->ins_lat. I think 
you can create your own field.

> as you mentioned. I checked the below patch defining an ‘arch_perf_parse_sample_weight' for powerpc and it works.
> 
> But one observation is that, for cases with kernel having support for PERF_SAMPLE_WEIGHT_STRUCT but missing arch specific support for  ‘arch_perf_parse_sample_weight', it will report ‘Local Weight’ wrongly since weak function takes it as 64 bit. Not sure if that is a valid case to consider though.

Currently, the PERF_SAMPLE_WEIGHT_STRUCT is only enabled on X86 by default.
https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/1612296553-21962-6-git-send-email-kan.liang@linux.intel.com/

For PowerPC, the PERF_SAMPLE_WEIGHT is still the default setting. There 
is no way to set PERF_SAMPLE_WEIGHT_STRUCT via perf tool.
I don't think the above case will happen.

Thanks,
Kan