From: Qinxin Xia <xiaqinxin@huawei.com>
To: Ian Rogers <irogers@google.com>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@redhat.com>,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@kernel.org>,
Namhyung Kim <namhyung@kernel.org>, Jiri Olsa <jolsa@kernel.org>,
Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@intel.com>,
James Clark <james.clark@linaro.org>,
Dapeng Mi <dapeng1.mi@linux.intel.com>,
Athira Rajeev <atrajeev@linux.ibm.com>,
Thomas Falcon <thomas.falcon@intel.com>,
<linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org>,
<linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1] perf pmu: Recognize default_core as a core PMU in more places
Date: Tue, 23 Jun 2026 14:22:44 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <a9f25a27-5f71-4d64-a42c-ef9c7ed8107b@huawei.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAP-5=fWY35hNSi8uNjX95TnDMmC3Pek9B7Yaf6Ax0ty_6ZtmCQ@mail.gmail.com>
On 2026/6/23 01:53:52, Ian Rogers <irogers@google.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 22, 2026 at 2:11 AM Qinxin Xia<xiaqinxin@huawei.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>> On 2026/6/12 09:24:13, Ian Rogers<irogers@google.com> wrote:
>>> The python metrics code used in places like ilist.py passes a
>>> pmu-filter of "default_core" on non-hybrid x86/ARM/.. systems. As a
>>> PMU like "cpu" isn't a literal name match then no PMU matches
>>> "default_core" and the events fail to parse for the metric. Fix the
>>> name matching and PMU lookup for "default_core" and check that it
>>> fixes ilist.py.
>>>
>>> Fixes: 74e2dbe7be50 ("perf tools: Add --pmu-filter option for filtering PMUs")
>>> Signed-off-by: Ian Rogers<irogers@google.com>
>>> ---
>>> Note: this bug is in 7.1 but it is a little too late to send for the
>>> release. It should get picked up via the fixes tag.
>>> ---
>>> tools/perf/util/pmu.c | 6 +++++-
>>> tools/perf/util/pmus.c | 2 ++
>>> 2 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/tools/perf/util/pmu.c b/tools/perf/util/pmu.c
>>> index a550f030b85d..836e3b5615cd 100644
>>> --- a/tools/perf/util/pmu.c
>>> +++ b/tools/perf/util/pmu.c
>>> @@ -2660,8 +2660,12 @@ bool perf_pmu__wildcard_match(const struct perf_pmu *pmu, const char *wildcard_t
>>> pmu->name,
>>> pmu->alias_name,
>>> };
>>> - bool need_fnmatch = strisglob(wildcard_to_match);
>>> + bool need_fnmatch;
>>>
>>> + if (pmu->is_core && !strcmp(wildcard_to_match, "default_core"))
>>> + return true;
>>> +
>>> + need_fnmatch = strisglob(wildcard_to_match);
>>> if (!strncmp(wildcard_to_match, "uncore_", 7))
>>> wildcard_to_match += 7;
>>>
>>> diff --git a/tools/perf/util/pmus.c b/tools/perf/util/pmus.c
>>> index 5e3f571450fe..e0a4cb2428ca 100644
>>> --- a/tools/perf/util/pmus.c
>>> +++ b/tools/perf/util/pmus.c
>>> @@ -150,6 +150,8 @@ struct perf_pmu *perf_pmus__find(const char *name)
>>> bool core_pmu;
>>> unsigned int to_read_pmus = 0;
>>>
>>> + if (!strcmp(name, "default_core"))
>>> + return perf_pmus__find_core_pmu();
>>> /*
>>> * Once PMU is loaded it stays in the list,
>>> * so we keep us from multiple reading/parsing
>> Thank you for the fix, Ian.
>> In the previous patch, I overlooked the handling of the "default_core"
>> alias. Also, perhaps we can leave need_fnmatch as-is, since it doesn't
>> seem to affect anything here.
> Thanks. I moved need_fnmatch's initialization just to save some work
> in the "default_core" case where the value is unused. While leaving it
> in place would reduce the diff, I think the optimization is worth it
> as we would otherwise call strisglob when say iterating all metrics.
>
Perhaps we can do it this way:
if (pmu->is_core && !strcmp(wildcard_to_match, "default_core"))
return true;
bool need_fnmatch = strisglob(wildcard_to_match);
> Would it be okay to supply a Reviewed-by tag? I notice this fix is
> missing from perf-tools-next.
>
Sure, add my Reviewed‑by.:-)
> Thanks!
> Ian
>
>> --
>> Thanks,
>> Qinxin
--
Thanks,
Qinxin
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2026-06-23 6:22 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2026-06-12 1:24 Ian Rogers
2026-06-22 9:11 ` Qinxin Xia
2026-06-22 17:53 ` Ian Rogers
2026-06-23 6:22 ` Qinxin Xia [this message]
2026-06-27 1:49 ` Ian Rogers
2026-07-01 17:43 ` Namhyung Kim
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=a9f25a27-5f71-4d64-a42c-ef9c7ed8107b@huawei.com \
--to=xiaqinxin@huawei.com \
--cc=acme@kernel.org \
--cc=adrian.hunter@intel.com \
--cc=atrajeev@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=dapeng1.mi@linux.intel.com \
--cc=irogers@google.com \
--cc=james.clark@linaro.org \
--cc=jolsa@kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=namhyung@kernel.org \
--cc=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=thomas.falcon@intel.com \
/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