From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.2 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B20E9C54E4A for ; Tue, 12 May 2020 10:14:10 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8E3C0206A3 for ; Tue, 12 May 2020 10:14:10 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1729118AbgELKOI (ORCPT ); Tue, 12 May 2020 06:14:08 -0400 Received: from lhrrgout.huawei.com ([185.176.76.210]:2193 "EHLO huawei.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-FAIL) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726187AbgELKOG (ORCPT ); Tue, 12 May 2020 06:14:06 -0400 Received: from lhreml724-chm.china.huawei.com (unknown [172.18.7.108]) by Forcepoint Email with ESMTP id C703479D73E2140BD683; Tue, 12 May 2020 11:14:04 +0100 (IST) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (10.210.169.134) by lhreml724-chm.china.huawei.com (10.201.108.75) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_128_GCM_SHA256) id 15.1.1913.5; Tue, 12 May 2020 11:14:03 +0100 Subject: Re: [PATCH RFC v3 00/12] perf pmu-events: Support event aliasing for system PMUs To: Joakim Zhang , "peterz@infradead.org" , "mingo@redhat.com" , "acme@kernel.org" , "mark.rutland@arm.com" , "alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com" , "jolsa@redhat.com" , "namhyung@kernel.org" CC: "irogers@google.com" , "ak@linux.intel.com" , "robin.murphy@arm.com" , Linuxarm , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , Zhangshaokun , "will@kernel.org" , "linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org" References: <1588852671-61996-1-git-send-email-john.garry@huawei.com> From: John Garry Message-ID: <2642e2a6-9e44-79c4-2bf5-498cedd897a4@huawei.com> Date: Tue, 12 May 2020 11:13:11 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; WOW64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.1.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="gbk"; format=flowed Content-Language: en-US Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Originating-IP: [10.210.169.134] X-ClientProxiedBy: lhreml733-chm.china.huawei.com (10.201.108.84) To lhreml724-chm.china.huawei.com (10.201.108.75) X-CFilter-Loop: Reflected Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org > I have an aside question, do you have any idea? Thanks a lot! > > For DDR PMU, I want to add bandwidth usage metric, but it depends on DDR controller clock frequency. > For example, we have i.MX8MM LPDDR4 board which DDR controller clock is 800MHZ, and i.MX8MM DDR4 board which DDR controller is 600MHZ, but the SoC is the same. > > So they can share all JSON metrics with identifier "i.mx8mm", except bandwidth metric. what is the bandwidth metric? how is it supposed to be calculated? If I add separate JOSN metrics files for identifier "i.mx8mm-lpddr4" and identifier "i.mx8mm-ddr4", then it's going to be very redundant, since most metrics are same just the identifier is different. > > Do you know how perf tool handle such case? jirka is supporting user-defined metric here: https://lore.kernel.org/lkml/20200511205307.3107775-1-jolsa@kernel.org/ So maybe you can use that somehow with separate scripts. Thanks, John