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;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <1612296553-21962-1-git-send-email-kan.liang@linux.intel.com>
 <1612296553-21962-7-git-send-email-kan.liang@linux.intel.com>
 <CAM9d7chGxZc0MA4nqVeJRDXLEzWsQ-ceJ+xgMVmEbQbDVDf72w@mail.gmail.com> <a1e837a6-9c6a-c613-d7b9-8e6547dfcf67@linux.intel.com>
In-Reply-To: <a1e837a6-9c6a-c613-d7b9-8e6547dfcf67@linux.intel.com>
From:   Namhyung Kim <namhyung@kernel.org>
Date:   Sat, 6 Feb 2021 17:09:33 +0900
Message-ID: <CAM9d7ci1qQy+oeOvKJE4N8nZxm6h+=vBP_wp_WXOhPnUphpJ-Q@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 6/9] perf report: Support instruction latency
To:     "Liang, Kan" <kan.liang@linux.intel.com>
Cc:     Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@kernel.org>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
        linux-kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
        Stephane Eranian <eranian@google.com>,
        Jiri Olsa <jolsa@redhat.com>, Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com>,
        Yao Jin <yao.jin@linux.intel.com>, maddy@linux.vnet.ibm.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Precedence: bulk

On Fri, Feb 5, 2021 at 11:38 PM Liang, Kan <kan.liang@linux.intel.com> wrote:
>
> On 2/5/2021 6:08 AM, Namhyung Kim wrote:
> > On Wed, Feb 3, 2021 at 5:14 AM <kan.liang@linux.intel.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> From: Kan Liang <kan.liang@linux.intel.com>
> >>
> >> The instruction latency information can be recorded on some platforms,
> >> e.g., the Intel Sapphire Rapids server. With both memory latency
> >> (weight) and the new instruction latency information, users can easily
> >> locate the expensive load instructions, and also understand the time
> >> spent in different stages. The users can optimize their applications
> >> in different pipeline stages.
> >>
> >> The 'weight' field is shared among different architectures. Reusing the
> >> 'weight' field may impacts other architectures. Add a new field to store
> >> the instruction latency.
> >>
> >> Like the 'weight' support, introduce a 'ins_lat' for the global
> >> instruction latency, and a 'local_ins_lat' for the local instruction
> >> latency version.
> >
> > Could you please clarify the difference between the global latency
> > and the local latency?
> >
>
> The global means the total latency.
> The local means average latency, aka total / number of samples.

Thanks for the explanation, but I think it's confusing.
Why not call it just total_latency and avg_latency?

Thanks,
Namhyung