Re: [patch] perf_events: even more wrong events for AMD fam10h

[Peter Zijlstra]

On Tue, 2011-06-07 at 17:07 -0400, Vince Weaver wrote:
> Here are two more problems I found with the superlative "generalized" 
> events on AMD fam10h.
> 
> The "l1-dcache-loads" event measures loads *and* stores.
>     This might be as close as you can get on AMD, but it's still wrong
>       as it's not what Intel measures.  
>     My patch removes it.  Better might be to add a proper
>     "l1-dcache-access" event.

The question to ask is, does it still have a strong correlation?

> The "l1-dcache-load-miss" event is an invalid event. (0x141).
>     From what I can tell that event (DATA_CACHE_MISSES) does not
>     take a mask.  It should be 0x41.  And it's actually measuring
>     all misses, not just load misses, see above.

See commit 83112e688f5f05dea1e63787db9a6c16b2887a1d. Also same as above.

> The "l1-dcache-stores" event does not work.  See the
>      ./validation/l1-dcache-stores test found in 
>      http://web.eecs.utk.edu/~vweaver1/projects/perf-events/validation.html
>    So remove it until we figure out why.
> 

Robert?

> Also, is the value for "no such event" 0 or -1?  The perf_event_amd.c
> file seems to use them interchangably from what I can tell.

	val = hw_cache_event_ids[cache_type][cache_op][cache_result];

	if (val == 0)
		return -ENOENT;

	if (val == -1)
		return -EINVAL;


But yeah, somewhat inconsistent. Robert, Andre, could you guys go over
the AMD events some time?
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/