Em Wed, Sep 28, 2016 at 11:29:16AM -0700, Sukadev Bhattiprolu escreveu:

Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo [acme@kernel.org] wrote:

quoted

Em Tue, Sep 27, 2016 at 11:11:16AM -0700, Sukadev Bhattiprolu escreveu:

quoted

Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo [acme@kernel.org] wrote:

quoted

Em Thu, Sep 15, 2016 at 03:24:43PM -0700, Sukadev Bhattiprolu escreveu:

quoted

From: Andi Kleen <redacted>
Add support to print alias descriptions in perf list, which
are taken from the generated event files.

The sorting code is changed to put the events with descriptions
at the end. The descriptions are printed as possibly multiple word
wrapped lines.

So, now I'm trying to reproduce the results below, but I couldn't find a
tarball with those .json files for me to use, can you provide me with
one?

The data files are in my github, in the json-code+data-v21 branch
starting with 23bb101. They are individual commits rather than a
tarball though.

Ok, I'll pick one for powerpc and another for x86_64 so that I can test
it and Jiri's x-compile support.

Please pull all files if possible, specially on x86, _before_ building the
perf binary. If you are going to pull only one, you need to make sure that
the file you pull matches the CPU model on the system you are testing.(see
below). For Power, you need to test on Power8.

quoted

Refresh my mind, what is the plan on these files? Are we just going to
provide pointers to where to get them from vendors, ship it in the
kernel, auto-download them as part of the build process?

They are supposed to be committed into the linux kernel tree as shown
in the json-code+data-v21 tree and they will be picked up _during build_
of the perf binary. (We are just not mailing those data files as patches
since they are large and there is very little value in reviewing them).

When building perf on on say x86, event tables for all the different
x86 CPU models will be included in the perf binary. When perf is then
executed on an x86 box, it will detect the CPU model of that box and
use the set of events corresponding to that model.

If the CPU model does not match the models "known" to the perf binary,
then the symbolic names will not work on that system, but there should
be no other change in behavior.

Patch 15/19 tries to explain the process.

I didn't get to that one yet.
 

quoted

At least examples that allows to build and have a new 'perf test' entry
to check them automatically seems to be in order, no?

Well, the hope was that build/usage will be transparent! but we did not

the 'perf test' entry is to test the whole process of going from a json
file to a the perf binary and then asking for one such event and
checking if the resulting perf_event_attr is what we expect it to be,
see, for instance:

[root@jouet c]# perf test roundtrip
11: roundtrip evsel->name check                              : Ok

tools/perf/tests/evsel-roundtrip-name.c

test in the cross-compile environment. Will think about a test case.
Please let me know if we can update the README in Patch 15/19 in any
way.

I'll let you know when I get to that patch, till then I'll follow the
instructions you gave me here.

I.e. I go on testing patch by patch, trying to use the documentation
that is available up to that point, trying to reproduce the results
described in the patch, to fully validate it.

- Arnaldo
 

quoted

quoted

	>       https://github.com/sukadev/linux.git
	>
	>       Branch                  Description
	>       ------------------------------------------------------
	>       json-code-v21           Source Code only
	>       json-code+data-v21      Both code and data(for build/test/pull)
	> 

Sukadev