From: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@redhat.com>
To: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
Cc: Pratyush Anand <panand@redhat.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Jeff Bastian <jbastian@redhat.com>,
Michael Petlan <mpetlan@redhat.com>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, arm-devel@redhat.com
Subject: Re: perf: wrong event->count report (Was: perf basic-test-aarch64 failures)
Date: Wed, 17 Feb 2016 10:35:39 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160217093539.GC10042@krava.brq.redhat.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160217033416.GA7371@redhat.com>
On Wed, Feb 17, 2016 at 04:34:16AM +0100, Oleg Nesterov wrote:
> Finally I reproduced... let me add CC's and reply to initial message. This has
> nothing to do with arm/uprobes.
>
> I simply can't understand how perf calculates ->total_time_enabled/running.
> At all. But the problem is that
>
> 1. perf_event_enable_on_exec() does enable first, then event_sched_in().
>
> After that tstamp_enabled < tstamp_running
>
> 2. This means that after the next update_event_times()
> total_time_running < total_time_enabled
>
> again, I fail to understand these calculations, but this is what
> perf_event_read_value() reports to user-space.
>
> 3. /usr/bin/perf calls perf_counts_values__scale() which does
>
> else if (count->run < count->ena) {
> scaled = 1;
> count->val = (u64)((double) count->val * count->ena / count->run + 0.5);
> }
>
> and this is why you see the wrong number. count->val was correct but
> wrongly updated because total_time_running < total_time_enabled.
>
> I leave this to Peter and Jiri ;)
I did not notice the ther conversation wasn't public, reposting ;-)
jirka
---
ouch, I tested with fedora kernel.. I can reproduce with 4.5
Pratyush bisected this into following commit:
[3e349507d12de93b08b0aa814fc2aa0dee91c5ba] perf: Fix perf_enable_on_exec() event scheduling
it seems the commit above introduced unwanted difference between
counter's enabled and running times.. I'm checking on that ;-)
as a workaround you could use --no-scale option to disable
scaling:
# perf stat --no-scale -x';' -e 'probe_exact:*' ./exact_counts
65535;;probe_exact:f_65535x;0;100.00
997;;probe_exact:f_997x;0;100.00
103;;probe_exact:f_103x;0;100.00
3;;probe_exact:f_3x;0;100.00
2;;probe_exact:f_2x;0;100.00
1;;probe_exact:f_1x;0;100.00
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-02-17 9:35 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <20160211093047.GA12115@dhcp-0-82.del.redhat.com>
[not found] ` <20160215070620.GA23850@dhcppc3.redhat.com>
2016-02-17 3:34 ` Oleg Nesterov
2016-02-17 9:35 ` Jiri Olsa [this message]
2016-02-17 10:25 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-02-17 14:44 ` Jiri Olsa
2016-02-17 14:56 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-02-17 19:34 ` Oleg Nesterov
2016-02-17 19:43 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-02-17 10:28 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-02-17 10:31 ` Jiri Olsa
2016-02-17 19:18 ` Oleg Nesterov
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20160217093539.GC10042@krava.brq.redhat.com \
--to=jolsa@redhat.com \
--cc=arm-devel@redhat.com \
--cc=jbastian@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mpetlan@redhat.com \
--cc=oleg@redhat.com \
--cc=panand@redhat.com \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®