Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Date:   Sat, 26 Mar 2022 10:54:34 -0300
From:   Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@kernel.org>
To:     Ali Saidi <alisaidi@amazon.com>
Cc:     linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, german.gomez@arm.com,
        leo.yan@linaro.org, benh@kernel.crashing.org,
        Nick.Forrington@arm.com, alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com,
        andrew.kilroy@arm.com, james.clark@arm.com, john.garry@huawei.com,
        jolsa@kernel.org, kjain@linux.ibm.com, lihuafei1@huawei.com,
        mark.rutland@arm.com, mathieu.poirier@linaro.org, mingo@redhat.com,
        namhyung@kernel.org, peterz@infradead.org, will@kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 3/4] perf mem: Support mem_lvl_num in c2c command
Message-ID: <Yj8bGiAlZL9mUW+c@kernel.org>
References: <20220324183323.31414-1-alisaidi@amazon.com>
 <20220324183323.31414-4-alisaidi@amazon.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20220324183323.31414-4-alisaidi@amazon.com>
Precedence: bulk

Em Thu, Mar 24, 2022 at 06:33:22PM +0000, Ali Saidi escreveu:
> In addition to summarizing data encoded in mem_lvl also support data
> encoded in mem_lvl_num.
> 
> Since other architectures don't seem to populate the mem_lvl_num field
> here there shouldn't be a change in functionality.

I'm removing this one as well, will wait for further discussion as the
other two got yanked out as per Leo's review comments.

The first patch is in with Leo's ack.

- Arnaldo
 
> Signed-off-by: Ali Saidi <alisaidi@amazon.com>
> Tested-by: German Gomez <german.gomez@arm.com>
> Reviewed-by: German Gomez <german.gomez@arm.com>
> ---
>  tools/perf/util/mem-events.c | 11 +++++++----
>  1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/tools/perf/util/mem-events.c b/tools/perf/util/mem-events.c
> index ed0ab838bcc5..e5e405185498 100644
> --- a/tools/perf/util/mem-events.c
> +++ b/tools/perf/util/mem-events.c
> @@ -485,6 +485,7 @@ int c2c_decode_stats(struct c2c_stats *stats, struct mem_info *mi)
>  	u64 daddr  = mi->daddr.addr;
>  	u64 op     = data_src->mem_op;
>  	u64 lvl    = data_src->mem_lvl;
> +	u64 lnum   = data_src->mem_lvl_num;
>  	u64 snoop  = data_src->mem_snoop;
>  	u64 lock   = data_src->mem_lock;
>  	u64 blk    = data_src->mem_blk;
> @@ -527,16 +528,18 @@ do {				\
>  			if (lvl & P(LVL, UNC)) stats->ld_uncache++;
>  			if (lvl & P(LVL, IO))  stats->ld_io++;
>  			if (lvl & P(LVL, LFB)) stats->ld_fbhit++;
> -			if (lvl & P(LVL, L1 )) stats->ld_l1hit++;
> -			if (lvl & P(LVL, L2 )) stats->ld_l2hit++;
> -			if (lvl & P(LVL, L3 )) {
> +			if (lvl & P(LVL, L1) || lnum == P(LVLNUM, L1))
> +				stats->ld_l1hit++;
> +			if (lvl & P(LVL, L2) || lnum == P(LVLNUM, L2))
> +				stats->ld_l2hit++;
> +			if (lvl & P(LVL, L3) || lnum == P(LVLNUM, L3)) {
>  				if (snoop & P(SNOOP, HITM))
>  					HITM_INC(lcl_hitm);
>  				else
>  					stats->ld_llchit++;
>  			}
>  
> -			if (lvl & P(LVL, LOC_RAM)) {
> +			if (lvl & P(LVL, LOC_RAM) || lnum == P(LVLNUM, RAM)) {
>  				stats->lcl_dram++;
>  				if (snoop & P(SNOOP, HIT))
>  					stats->ld_shared++;
> -- 
> 2.32.0

-- 

- Arnaldo