On 6/1/2023 7:51 PM, Alex Bennée wrote: > > "Wu, Fei" <fei2...@intel.com> writes: > >> On 5/30/2023 6:08 PM, Alex Bennée wrote: >>> >>> "Wu, Fei" <fei2...@intel.com> writes: >>> >>>> On 5/30/2023 1:01 PM, Wu, Fei wrote: >>>>> On 5/30/2023 12:07 PM, Richard Henderson wrote: >>>>>> On 5/29/23 04:49, Fei Wu wrote: > <snip> >> ---------------- >> IN: >> Priv: 1; Virt: 0 >> >> 0xffffffff800abe14: 864a mv a2,s2 >> 0xffffffff800abe16: 85ce mv a1,s3 >> 0xffffffff800abe18: 8526 mv a0,s1 >> 0xffffffff800abe1a: 46bd addi a3,zero,15 >> 0xffffffff800abe1c: fffff097 auipc ra,-4096 >> # 0xffffffff800aae1c >> 0xffffffff800abe20: cc0080e7 jalr ra,ra,-832 >> ------------------------------ >> >> Look at the tb with phys:0x2abe14, although the first time IR takes >> 75274ns, but in the second command we can see it takes much less time >> (Note IR time is accumulated). >> >> So if the time for the same TB is not consistent, and the deviation >> could be dominated by system events such as memory allocation instead of >> codegen itself (?), I think it's less useful. >> >> Alex, regarding dropping time profile, do you mean remove TB_JIT_TIME >> completely? > > I think so - perf would do a better job of separating system events from > the core code as it has better visibility of the whole system. > OK, got it.
Richard, can we reach the agreement here? If yes, I will remove TB_JIT_TIME and all the time stuffs (dev_time, cpu_exec_time) completely. We can still add it back if it proves to be useful. The only concern is that tbstats replaces CONFIG_PROFILER but drops this function from it. Thanks, Fei.
