Re: [PATCH v4 00/22] Python generated Intel metrics

[Ian Rogers]

On Wed, Nov 6, 2024 at 8:47 AM Liang, Kan <kan.liang@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>
>
> On 2024-10-09 12:02 p.m., Ian Rogers wrote:
> > On Fri, Sep 27, 2024 at 11:34 AM Liang, Kan <kan.liang@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On 2024-09-26 1:50 p.m., Ian Rogers wrote:
> >>> Generate twenty sets of additional metrics for Intel. Rapl and Idle
> >>> metrics aren't specific to Intel but are placed here for ease and
> >>> convenience. Smi and tsx metrics are added so they can be dropped from
> >>> the per model json files.
> >>
> >> Are Smi and tsx metrics the only two metrics who's duplicate metrics in
> >> the json files will be dropped?
> >
> > Yes. These metrics with their runtime detection and use of sysfs event
> > names I feel more naturally fit here rather than in the Intel perfmon
> > github converter script.
> >
> >> It sounds like there will be many duplicate metrics in perf list, right?
> >
> > That's not the goal. There may be memory bandwidth computed in
> > different ways, like TMA and using uncore, but that seems okay as the
> > metrics are using different counters so may say different things. I
> > think there is an action to always watch the metrics and ensure
> > duplicates don't occur, but some duplication can be beneficial.
>
>
> Can we give a common prefix for all the automatically generated metrics,
> e.g., general_ or std_?
> As you said, there may be different metrics to calculate the same thing.
>
> With a common prefix, we can clearly understand where the metrics is
> from. In case, there are any issues found later for some metrics. I can
> tell the end user to use either the TMA metrics or the automatically
> generated metrics.
> If they count the same thing, the main body of the metric name should be
> the same.

I'm reminded of the default events where some of the set fail on AMD,
and of AMD calling their topdown like metrics things like PipelineL1
and PipelineL2 rather than the Intel names of TopdownL1 and TopdownL2.
Like you I have a desire for consistent naming, it just seems we
always get pulled away from it.

I'm going to post a v5 of these changes, we carry them in:
https://github.com/googleprodkernel/linux-perf
but I'll not vary the naming for now.

Thanks,
Ian