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;
Message-ID: <f3aa49ff-958a-df73-f0cb-e48f73f70e8a@linux.intel.com>
Date:   Wed, 20 Apr 2022 15:02:42 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
 Thunderbird/91.8.0
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 5/5] perf mem: Support mem_lvl_num in c2c command
Content-Language: en-US
To:     Ali Saidi <alisaidi@amazon.com>, 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, acme@kernel.org
Cc:     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
References: <20220408195344.32764-1-alisaidi@amazon.com>
 <20220408195344.32764-6-alisaidi@amazon.com>
From:   "Liang, Kan" <kan.liang@linux.intel.com>
In-Reply-To: <20220408195344.32764-6-alisaidi@amazon.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Precedence: bulk


On 4/8/2022 3:53 PM, Ali Saidi wrote:
> 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.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Ali Saidi <alisaidi@amazon.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)) {

I think the PERF_MEM_LVLNUM_RAM only means it's a DRAM.
It doesn't contain the location information. To distinguish the local 
and remote dram, X86 uses PERF_MEM_REMOTE_REMOTE.
Here the remote dram will be mistakenly calculated if you only check the 
PERF_MEM_LVLNUM_RAM.

Actually, it looks like the mem_lvl_num fields supported in this patch 
are also supported by the PERF_MEM_LVL*. Why don't you set both 
PERF_MEM_LVLNUM_* and PERF_MEM_LVL* in your previous patch 4?
Then you can drop this patch.

Thanks,
Kan
>   				stats->lcl_dram++;
>   				if (snoop & P(SNOOP, HIT))
>   					stats->ld_shared++;