On Thu, Oct 17, 2019 at 12:38:51PM +0530, Ganapatrao Kulkarni wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 16, 2019 at 7:01 PM John Garry <john.garry@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > > +TX2_EVENT_ATTR(req_pktsent, CCPI2_EVENT_REQ_PKT_SENT);
> > > +TX2_EVENT_ATTR(snoop_pktsent, CCPI2_EVENT_SNOOP_PKT_SENT);
> > > +TX2_EVENT_ATTR(data_pktsent, CCPI2_EVENT_DATA_PKT_SENT);
> > > +TX2_EVENT_ATTR(gic_pktsent, CCPI2_EVENT_GIC_PKT_SENT);
> > > +
> > > +static struct attribute *ccpi2_pmu_events_attrs[] = {
> > > + &tx2_pmu_event_attr_req_pktsent.attr.attr,
> > > + &tx2_pmu_event_attr_snoop_pktsent.attr.attr,
> > > + &tx2_pmu_event_attr_data_pktsent.attr.attr,
> > > + &tx2_pmu_event_attr_gic_pktsent.attr.attr,
> > > + NULL,
> > > +};
> >
> > Hi Ganapatrao,
> >
> > Have you considered adding these as uncore pmu-events in the perf tool?
> >
> At the moment no, since the number of events exposed/listed are very few.
Then sounds like a perfect time to nip it in the bud before the list grows
;)
If you can manage with these things in userspace, then I agree with John
that it would be preferential to do it that way. It also offers more
flexibility if we get the metricgroup stuff working properly (I think it's
buggered for big/little atm).
Will
