Re: [PATCH] perf vendor events: Add missing Neoverse V1 events

[Nick Forrington <nick.forrington@arm.com>]

On 02/09/2022 20:25, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
> Em Fri, Sep 02, 2022 at 03:12:49PM +0100, Nick Forrington escreveu:
>> On 02/09/2022 09:04, John Garry wrote:
>>> On 01/09/2022 16:18, Nick Forrington wrote:
>>>> Based on updated data from:
>>>> https://github.com/ARM-software/data/blob/master/pmu/neoverse-v1.json
>>>>
>>>> which is based on PMU event descriptions from the Arm Neoverse V1
>>>> Technical Reference Manual.
>>>>
>>>> This adds the following missing events:
>>>> ASE_INST_SPEC
>>>> SVE_INST_SPEC
>>>> SVE_PRED_SPEC
>>>> SVE_PRED_EMPTY_SPEC
>>>> SVE_PRED_FULL_SPEC
>>>> SVE_PRED_PARTIAL_SPEC
>>>> SVE_LDFF_SPEC
>>>> SVE_LDFF_FAULT_SPEC
>>>> FP_SCALE_OPS_SPEC
>>>> FP_FIXED_OPS_SPEC
>>>>
>>>> It also moves REMOTE_ACCESS from other.json to memory.json.
>>> Any specific reason why? I see that neoverse n2 and a76-n1 still use
>>> "other" json for REMOTE_ACCESS. Nicer to be consistent.
>> Thanks John, I agree on consistency.
>>
>> I think memory is a better categorisation (for all CPUs), and this is
>> consistent with what I submitted for various Cortex CPUs a while back.
> Were those patches processed or is some still outstanding?

Those were processed.

(REMOTE_ACCESS appears in memory.json for the Cortex JSON files)

>   
>> I'd be happy to remove the REMOTE_ACCESS change here and update (or not)
>> REMOTE_ACCESS for Neoverse separately.
>>
>>>> Signed-off-by: Nick Forrington<nick.forrington@arm.com>
>>>> ---
>>> Apart from above:
>>> Reviewed-by: John Garry <john.garry@huawei.com>
>> Thanks, Nick
> So, how should we proceed?
>
> - Arnaldo

I'll update this patch to remove the REMOTE_ACCESS change, and submit a 
separate patch to make REMOTE_ACCESS categorisation consistent across 
all CPUs.