[RFC V2 1/3] perf, tools: Support wildcards on pmu name in dynamic pmu events

[Jiri Olsa]

On Mon, Mar 05, 2018 at 03:10:43PM -0500, Agustin Vega-Frias wrote:
> On 2018-03-05 14:09, Jiri Olsa wrote:
> > On Mon, Mar 05, 2018 at 10:08:18AM -0500, Agustin Vega-Frias wrote:
> > > On 2018-03-04 13:10, Jiri Olsa wrote:
> > > > On Sun, Mar 04, 2018 at 09:12:45AM -0800, Andi Kleen wrote:
> > > > > > > +#include <fnmatch.h>
> > > > > > >  #include <linux/compiler.h>
> > > > > > >  #include <linux/list.h>
> > > > > > >  #include <linux/types.h>
> > > > > > > @@ -241,7 +242,7 @@ PE_NAME opt_event_config
> > > > > > >  			if (!strncmp(name, "uncore_", 7) &&
> > > > > > >  			    strncmp($1, "uncore_", 7))
> > > > > > >  				name += 7;
> > > > > > > -			if (!strncmp($1, name, strlen($1))) {
> > > > > > > +			if (!strncmp($1, name, strlen($1)) || !fnmatch($1, name, 0)) {
> > > > > >
> > > > > > could we now get rid of the strncmp in here and keep the
> > > > > > glob matching only?
> > > > >
> > > > > That would break existing command lines. Not a good idea.
> > > >
> > > > I hoped that only you guys are using this and would rewrite your scripts
> > > > ;-)
> > > >
> > > > I had no idea there's fnmatch func before.. too bad, ok
> > > >
> > > > jirka
> > > 
> > > An option to keep backward compatibility and consistency would be
> > > to wrap the pattern/string passed in *'s, that way we can just use
> > > fnmatch and have all the examples Jiri brought up work the same.
> > > With that in place we can actually also drop the explicit ignoring
> > > of the uncore_ prefix since the globbing would take care of that.
> > 
> > I don't mind the strcmp as such, I wanted to get rid of the wildcard
> > matching without using '*' ... but as Andi said it's been out
> > there and it's been a while, so let's keep it
> > 
> > but if there's a way to make it simpler, let's go for it
> > 
> > thanks,
> > jirka
> 
> Sounds good. I have a new version ready (see sample output below).
> But I wanted to ping about the other two patches before submitting.
> Any feedback on those?

the rest looks ok to me, so does the output below

thanks,
jirka

> 
> Thanks,
> Agustín
> 
> PS:
> Sample output:
> 
> $ ./perf stat -a -e imc/umask=0x3,event=0x4/ --no-merge ls -l > /dev/null
> 
>  Performance counter stats for 'system wide':
> 
>              2,613      uncore_imc_0/umask=0x3,event=0x4/
>              2,736      uncore_imc_1/umask=0x3,event=0x4/
>              2,671      uncore_imc_2/umask=0x3,event=0x4/
>              2,508      uncore_imc_3/umask=0x3,event=0x4/
>              2,439      uncore_imc_4/umask=0x3,event=0x4/
>              2,465      uncore_imc_5/umask=0x3,event=0x4/
> 
>        0.004159243 seconds time elapsed
> 
> $ ./perf stat -a -e *imc/umask=0x3,event=0x4/ --no-merge ls -l > /dev/null
> 
>  Performance counter stats for 'system wide':
> 
>              2,704      uncore_imc_0/umask=0x3,event=0x4/
>              2,601      uncore_imc_1/umask=0x3,event=0x4/
>              2,625      uncore_imc_2/umask=0x3,event=0x4/
>              2,370      uncore_imc_3/umask=0x3,event=0x4/
>              2,485      uncore_imc_4/umask=0x3,event=0x4/
>              2,431      uncore_imc_5/umask=0x3,event=0x4/
> 
>        0.002716763 seconds time elapsed
> 
> $ ./perf stat -a -e imc*/umask=0x3,event=0x4/ --no-merge ls -l > /dev/null
> 
>  Performance counter stats for 'system wide':
> 
>              1,294      uncore_imc_0/umask=0x3,event=0x4/
>              1,303      uncore_imc_1/umask=0x3,event=0x4/
>              1,242      uncore_imc_2/umask=0x3,event=0x4/
>              1,125      uncore_imc_3/umask=0x3,event=0x4/
>              1,137      uncore_imc_4/umask=0x3,event=0x4/
>              1,159      uncore_imc_5/umask=0x3,event=0x4/
> 
>        0.002790441 seconds time elapsed
> 
> $ ./perf stat -a -e *imc*/umask=0x3,event=0x4/ --no-merge ls -l > /dev/null
> 
>  Performance counter stats for 'system wide':
> 
>              1,524      uncore_imc_0/umask=0x3,event=0x4/
>              1,508      uncore_imc_1/umask=0x3,event=0x4/
>              1,501      uncore_imc_2/umask=0x3,event=0x4/
>              1,405      uncore_imc_3/umask=0x3,event=0x4/
>              1,427      uncore_imc_4/umask=0x3,event=0x4/
>              1,450      uncore_imc_5/umask=0x3,event=0x4/
> 
>        0.002720907 seconds time elapsed
> 
> -- 
> Qualcomm Datacenter Technologies, Inc. on behalf of the Qualcomm
> Technologies, Inc.
> Qualcomm Technologies, Inc. is a member of the Code Aurora Forum, a Linux
> Foundation Collaborative Project.