Re: [PATCH 7/7] perf: Add load latency monitoring on IntelNehalem/Westmere v2

From: Peter Zijlstra
Date: Wed Jan 05 2011 - 04:50:48 EST


On Mon, 2010-12-27 at 23:39 +0800, Lin Ming wrote:
> +/* Bits(0-1) {L1, L2, L3, RAM} or {unknown, IO, uncached} */
> +#define LD_LAT_L1 0x00
> +#define LD_LAT_L2 0x01
> +#define LD_LAT_L3 0x02
> +#define LD_LAT_RAM 0x03
> +#define LD_LAT_UNKNOWN 0x00
> +#define LD_LAT_IO 0x01
> +#define LD_LAT_UNCACHED 0x02
> +
> +/* Bits(2-3) {not-used, snoop, local, remote} */
> +#define LD_LAT_NOT_USED (0x00 << 2)
> +#define LD_LAT_SNOOP (0x01 << 2)
> +#define LD_LAT_LOCAL (0x02 << 2)
> +#define LD_LAT_REMOTE (0x03 << 2)
> +
> +/* Bits(4-5) {modified, exclusive, shared, invalid} */
> +#define LD_LAT_MODIFIED (0x00 << 4)
> +#define LD_LAT_EXCLUSIVE (0x01 << 4)
> +#define LD_LAT_SHARED (0x02 << 4)
> +#define LD_LAT_INVALID (0x03 << 4)
> +
> +#define LD_LAT_RESERVED 0x3F


Also, I guess we need to go actually look at the POWER, IA64 and other
PMU docs to see if this sufficiently covers their data-source
capabilities.

Stephane, do you know of more PMUs with data-source capabilities we need
to include in the audit, and do you happen to have all their docs
readily available or do I need to ask google?
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/