From: Lin Feng <linf@wangsu.com>
To: peterz@infradead.org, mingo@redhat.com, acme@kernel.org,
ak@linux.intel.com, liuqi115@hisilicon.com
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Lin Feng <linf@wangsu.com>
Subject: [PATCH] Perf stat: Fix the ratio comments of cache miss-events
Date: Thu, 13 Feb 2020 16:55:40 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200213085540.14998-1-linf@wangsu.com> (raw)
Perf stat displays miss ratio of L1-dcache, L1-icache, dTLB cache,
iTLB cache and LL-cache, while the comments for them seem a bit
misleading. Take L1-dcache for example, its miss ratio
is caculated as "L1-dcache-load-misses/L1-dcache-loads". So "of all
L1-dcache hits" is unsuitable to describe it, and "of all L1-dcache
accesses/references" seems better.
285,132,521 cache-misses # 53.696 % of all cache refs [83.34%]
531,015,219 cache-references [83.20%]
220,465,183 LLC-load-misses # 72.33% of all LL-cache miss [83.44%]
^^^^
304,787,745 LLC-loads [66.60%]
There is an old patch here https://lkml.org/lkml/2019/11/16/37, but
seems not upstreamed yet. This patch follows suggestions by Arnaldo.
But one difference is using "refs" to follow the convention because
there is comment also for cache-misses event which uses
"of all cache refs".
The comments of L1-icache, dTLB cache, iTLB cache and LL-cache are
fixed in the same way.
P.S. Liu and Andi if you don't mind this patch adds your Reviewed-by
and Signed-off-by, thanks.
Reviewed-by: Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Qi Liu <liuqi115@hisilicon.com>
Signed-off-by: Lin Feng <linf@wangsu.com>
---
tools/perf/util/stat-shadow.c | 20 ++++++++++----------
1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
diff --git a/tools/perf/util/stat-shadow.c b/tools/perf/util/stat-shadow.c
index 2c41d47f6f83..070e9749e934 100644
--- a/tools/perf/util/stat-shadow.c
+++ b/tools/perf/util/stat-shadow.c
@@ -506,7 +506,7 @@ static void print_l1_dcache_misses(struct perf_stat_config *config,
color = get_ratio_color(GRC_CACHE_MISSES, ratio);
- out->print_metric(config, out->ctx, color, "%7.2f%%", "of all L1-dcache hits", ratio);
+ out->print_metric(config, out->ctx, color, "%7.2f%%", "of all L1-dcache refs", ratio);
}
static void print_l1_icache_misses(struct perf_stat_config *config,
@@ -527,7 +527,7 @@ static void print_l1_icache_misses(struct perf_stat_config *config,
ratio = avg / total * 100.0;
color = get_ratio_color(GRC_CACHE_MISSES, ratio);
- out->print_metric(config, out->ctx, color, "%7.2f%%", "of all L1-icache hits", ratio);
+ out->print_metric(config, out->ctx, color, "%7.2f%%", "of all L1-icache refs", ratio);
}
static void print_dtlb_cache_misses(struct perf_stat_config *config,
@@ -547,7 +547,7 @@ static void print_dtlb_cache_misses(struct perf_stat_config *config,
ratio = avg / total * 100.0;
color = get_ratio_color(GRC_CACHE_MISSES, ratio);
- out->print_metric(config, out->ctx, color, "%7.2f%%", "of all dTLB cache hits", ratio);
+ out->print_metric(config, out->ctx, color, "%7.2f%%", "of all dTLB cache refs", ratio);
}
static void print_itlb_cache_misses(struct perf_stat_config *config,
@@ -567,7 +567,7 @@ static void print_itlb_cache_misses(struct perf_stat_config *config,
ratio = avg / total * 100.0;
color = get_ratio_color(GRC_CACHE_MISSES, ratio);
- out->print_metric(config, out->ctx, color, "%7.2f%%", "of all iTLB cache hits", ratio);
+ out->print_metric(config, out->ctx, color, "%7.2f%%", "of all iTLB cache refs", ratio);
}
static void print_ll_cache_misses(struct perf_stat_config *config,
@@ -587,7 +587,7 @@ static void print_ll_cache_misses(struct perf_stat_config *config,
ratio = avg / total * 100.0;
color = get_ratio_color(GRC_CACHE_MISSES, ratio);
- out->print_metric(config, out->ctx, color, "%7.2f%%", "of all LL-cache hits", ratio);
+ out->print_metric(config, out->ctx, color, "%7.2f%%", "of all LL-cache refs", ratio);
}
/*
@@ -872,7 +872,7 @@ void perf_stat__print_shadow_stats(struct perf_stat_config *config,
if (runtime_stat_n(st, STAT_L1_DCACHE, ctx, cpu) != 0)
print_l1_dcache_misses(config, cpu, evsel, avg, out, st);
else
- print_metric(config, ctxp, NULL, NULL, "of all L1-dcache hits", 0);
+ print_metric(config, ctxp, NULL, NULL, "of all L1-dcache refs", 0);
} else if (
evsel->core.attr.type == PERF_TYPE_HW_CACHE &&
evsel->core.attr.config == ( PERF_COUNT_HW_CACHE_L1I |
@@ -882,7 +882,7 @@ void perf_stat__print_shadow_stats(struct perf_stat_config *config,
if (runtime_stat_n(st, STAT_L1_ICACHE, ctx, cpu) != 0)
print_l1_icache_misses(config, cpu, evsel, avg, out, st);
else
- print_metric(config, ctxp, NULL, NULL, "of all L1-icache hits", 0);
+ print_metric(config, ctxp, NULL, NULL, "of all L1-icache refs", 0);
} else if (
evsel->core.attr.type == PERF_TYPE_HW_CACHE &&
evsel->core.attr.config == ( PERF_COUNT_HW_CACHE_DTLB |
@@ -892,7 +892,7 @@ void perf_stat__print_shadow_stats(struct perf_stat_config *config,
if (runtime_stat_n(st, STAT_DTLB_CACHE, ctx, cpu) != 0)
print_dtlb_cache_misses(config, cpu, evsel, avg, out, st);
else
- print_metric(config, ctxp, NULL, NULL, "of all dTLB cache hits", 0);
+ print_metric(config, ctxp, NULL, NULL, "of all dTLB cache refs", 0);
} else if (
evsel->core.attr.type == PERF_TYPE_HW_CACHE &&
evsel->core.attr.config == ( PERF_COUNT_HW_CACHE_ITLB |
@@ -902,7 +902,7 @@ void perf_stat__print_shadow_stats(struct perf_stat_config *config,
if (runtime_stat_n(st, STAT_ITLB_CACHE, ctx, cpu) != 0)
print_itlb_cache_misses(config, cpu, evsel, avg, out, st);
else
- print_metric(config, ctxp, NULL, NULL, "of all iTLB cache hits", 0);
+ print_metric(config, ctxp, NULL, NULL, "of all iTLB cache refs", 0);
} else if (
evsel->core.attr.type == PERF_TYPE_HW_CACHE &&
evsel->core.attr.config == ( PERF_COUNT_HW_CACHE_LL |
@@ -912,7 +912,7 @@ void perf_stat__print_shadow_stats(struct perf_stat_config *config,
if (runtime_stat_n(st, STAT_LL_CACHE, ctx, cpu) != 0)
print_ll_cache_misses(config, cpu, evsel, avg, out, st);
else
- print_metric(config, ctxp, NULL, NULL, "of all LL-cache hits", 0);
+ print_metric(config, ctxp, NULL, NULL, "of all LL-cache refs", 0);
} else if (perf_evsel__match(evsel, HARDWARE, HW_CACHE_MISSES)) {
total = runtime_stat_avg(st, STAT_CACHEREFS, ctx, cpu);
--
2.20.1
next reply other threads:[~2020-02-13 9:33 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-02-13 8:55 Lin Feng [this message]
2020-02-17 8:07 ` Qi Liu
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=20200213085540.14998-1-linf@wangsu.com \
--to=linf@wangsu.com \
--cc=acme@kernel.org \
--cc=ak@linux.intel.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=liuqi115@hisilicon.com \
--cc=mingo@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®