Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757863AbZFYPMe (ORCPT ); Thu, 25 Jun 2009 11:12:34 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752580AbZFYPM0 (ORCPT ); Thu, 25 Jun 2009 11:12:26 -0400 Received: from hera.kernel.org ([140.211.167.34]:51298 "EHLO hera.kernel.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752419AbZFYPM0 (ORCPT ); Thu, 25 Jun 2009 11:12:26 -0400 Subject: Re: [PATCH -tip] perf_counter tools: shorten names for events From: Jaswinder Singh Rajput To: Roland Dreier Cc: Thomas Gleixner , Ingo Molnar , Peter Zijlstra , LKML In-Reply-To: References: <1245760130.3776.6.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20090623195656.GC8777@elte.hu> <1245876060.3038.7.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20090625092409.GC23547@elte.hu> <1245936216.5308.43.camel@hpdv5.satnam> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Thu, 25 Jun 2009 20:41:53 +0530 Message-Id: <1245942713.9157.2.camel@hpdv5.satnam> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.24.5 (2.24.5-1.fc10) Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1330 Lines: 34 On Thu, 2009-06-25 at 08:05 -0700, Roland Dreier wrote: > > This still looks ugly and lines are again long check for > > 'L1-dcache-prefetch-misses' and does not solve the purpose : > > > > Performance counter stats for 'ls -lR /usr/include/': > > > > 254259235 L1-dcache-loads (scaled from 22.69%) > > 1129360 L1-dcache-load-misses (scaled from 23.05%) > > 151929 L1-dcache-stores (scaled from 22.94%) > > 395089 L1-dcache-prefetches (scaled from 23.30%) > > 273699 L1-dcache-prefetch-misses (scaled from 23.19%) > > 253780608 L1-icache-loads (scaled from 23.07%) > > 4014781 L1-icache-load-misses (scaled from 23.16%) > > But even the longest line there (dcache-prefetch-misses) is only 64 > columns long, so you could just align the "(scaled" part a little > further to the right and keep the output under, say, 72 columns. > BTW, this is a shorten patch not widen patch ;-) L1d and L1i is self explanatory. If iTLB and dTLB are valid then why not L1d and L1i ? Thanks, -- JSR -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/