Re: [PATCH v4 0/5] A mechanism for efficient support for per-function metrics

[Mark Barnett]

On 4/9/25 15:29, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 08, 2025 at 06:15:25PM +0100, mark.barnett@xxxxxxx wrote:
>
> >      perf record -T --sample-cpu --call-graph fp,4 --user-callchains \
> >          -k CLOCK_MONOTONIC_RAW \
> >          -e '{cycles/period=999700,alt-period=300/,instructions,branch-misses,cache-references,cache-misses}:uS' \
> >          benchmark 0 1
>
> >      perf record -i -vvv -e '{cycles/period=999700,alt-period=300/,instructions}:uS' benchmark 0 1
>
> Should be updated to read something like:
>
> 	cycles/period=1000000,hf-period=300/
>
> right?
>
> Also, cycles/freq=1000,hf-period=300/ should now also work, right?
>
> Anyway, the kernel bits look good to me now (with the nits fixed), so:
>
> Acked-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>

Yes, freq works. I'll update the cover letter and address the nits in 
the next submission.

Thanks!