[PATCH v5 1/5] perf metric: Event "Compat" value supports matching multiple identifiers
John Garry
john.g.garry at oracle.com
Fri Jul 28 01:11:01 PDT 2023
On 28/07/2023 07:17, Jing Zhang wrote:
> The jevent "Compat" is used for uncore PMU alias or metric definitions.
>
> The same PMU driver has different PMU identifiers due to different hardware
> versions and types, but they may have some common PMU event/metric. Since a
> Compat value can only match one identifier, when adding the same event
> alias and metric to PMUs with different identifiers, each identifier needs
> to be defined once, which is not streamlined enough.
>
> So let "Compat" value supports matching multiple identifiers. For example,
> the Compat value {abcde;123*}
why not use a comma-separated list? that is more common
> can match the PMU identifier "abcde" and the
> the PMU identifier with the prefix "123",
I have to admit that this is not a great example as it does not match an
expected real-life scenario. I mean, I would not expect a PMU identifier
for the same PMU to be in either format "abcde" or "123*". I would
expect to be in only ever one format.
> where "*" is a wildcard.
> Tokens in Unit field are delimited by ';' with no spaces.
>
> Signed-off-by: Jing Zhang <renyu.zj at linux.alibaba.com>
> ---
> tools/perf/util/metricgroup.c | 2 +-
> tools/perf/util/pmu.c | 27 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++-
> tools/perf/util/pmu.h | 1 +
> 3 files changed, 28 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/tools/perf/util/metricgroup.c b/tools/perf/util/metricgroup.c
> index 5e9c657..ff81bc5 100644
> --- a/tools/perf/util/metricgroup.c
> +++ b/tools/perf/util/metricgroup.c
> @@ -477,7 +477,7 @@ static int metricgroup__sys_event_iter(const struct pmu_metric *pm,
>
> while ((pmu = perf_pmu__scan(pmu))) {
>
> - if (!pmu->id || strcmp(pmu->id, pm->compat))
> + if (!pmu->id || !pmu_uncore_identifier_match(pmu->id, pm->compat))
> continue;
>
> return d->fn(pm, table, d->data);
> diff --git a/tools/perf/util/pmu.c b/tools/perf/util/pmu.c
> index ad209c8..3ae249b 100644
> --- a/tools/perf/util/pmu.c
> +++ b/tools/perf/util/pmu.c
> @@ -776,6 +776,31 @@ static bool pmu_uncore_alias_match(const char *pmu_name, const char *name)
> return res;
> }
>
> +bool pmu_uncore_identifier_match(const char *id, const char *compat)
> +{
> + char *tmp = NULL, *tok, *str;
> + bool res;
> + int n;
> +
> + str = strdup(compat);
why duplicate this? are you modifying something?
> + if (!str)
> + return false;
> +
> + tok = strtok_r(str, ";", &tmp);
> + for (; tok; tok = strtok_r(NULL, ";", &tmp)) {
> + n = strlen(tok);
> + if ((tok[n - 1] == '*' && !strncmp(id, tok, n - 1)) ||
> + !strcmp(id, tok)) {
> + res = true;
> + goto out;
> + }
> + }
> + res = false;
> +out:
> + free(str);
> + return res;
> +}
> +
> struct pmu_add_cpu_aliases_map_data {
> struct list_head *head;
> const char *name;
> @@ -847,7 +872,7 @@ static int pmu_add_sys_aliases_iter_fn(const struct pmu_event *pe,
This is not for metrics specifically. You are really doing 2x things
here. I suggest that you split the patch out into 1st pmu.c change and
2nd metricgroup.c change
> if (!pe->compat || !pe->pmu)
> return 0;
>
> - if (!strcmp(pmu->id, pe->compat) &&
> + if (pmu_uncore_identifier_match(pmu->id, pe->compat) &&
> pmu_uncore_alias_match(pe->pmu, pmu->name)) {
nit: let's change order to check alias and then identifier
> __perf_pmu__new_alias(idata->head, -1,
> (char *)pe->name,
> diff --git a/tools/perf/util/pmu.h b/tools/perf/util/pmu.h
> index b9a02de..9d4385d 100644
> --- a/tools/perf/util/pmu.h
> +++ b/tools/perf/util/pmu.h
> @@ -241,6 +241,7 @@ void pmu_add_cpu_aliases_table(struct list_head *head, struct perf_pmu *pmu,
> char *perf_pmu__getcpuid(struct perf_pmu *pmu);
> const struct pmu_events_table *pmu_events_table__find(void);
> const struct pmu_metrics_table *pmu_metrics_table__find(void);
> +bool pmu_uncore_identifier_match(const char *id, const char *compat);
> void perf_pmu_free_alias(struct perf_pmu_alias *alias);
>
> int perf_pmu__convert_scale(const char *scale, char **end, double *sval);
Thanks,
John
More information about the linux-arm-kernel
mailing list