On Fri, 3 May 2013, Dan Terpstra wrote: > > My "hack" was only for the uncore, the regular Ivybridge events have been > > supported properly for some time. > > Yeah but the regular Ivy events don't include FP_COMP_OPS_EXE > and SIMD_FP_256.
well, for the obvious reasons that Intel doesn't support them. What I'm saying is that my hack only added a model ID for the uncore, which is a separate PMU for the regular events. Hence I didn't switch my machine to all SNB events.. it still has the default IVB enabled. I just added the SNB uncore in addition. > Why did you use x87 events? Seems like SSE_SCALAR would have been more > relevant. Although maybe less deterministic :-) When I first started gathering results there weren't any IVB or SNB machines, and I just kept collecting the same set of events. With x87 there is often a "gather all x87 ops" event. As we all know there's no direct SSE equivelent, you end up needing to collect like 5 different events and add them all up, and I don't think anyone has really tested that that gives you anything useful. > Yeah, that's why I suggested the need for a libpfm4 hack, since you were > hacking anyway :-) it's easy enough with perf to just use the raw event numbers. Would it make sense to export that capability to PAPI somehow? Then if you really wanted to force things you could just put something like "r50003c:u" or whatever as the event name in papi_events.csv Vince ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Get 100% visibility into Java/.NET code with AppDynamics Lite It's a free troubleshooting tool designed for production Get down to code-level detail for bottlenecks, with <2% overhead. Download for free and get started troubleshooting in minutes. http://p.sf.net/sfu/appdyn_d2d_ap2 _______________________________________________ perfmon2-devel mailing list perfmon2-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/perfmon2-devel
