On 08/08/2017 08:05 PM, Laurent Dufour wrote: > Add support for the new speculative faults events. > > Signed-off-by: Laurent Dufour <lduf...@linux.vnet.ibm.com> > --- > tools/include/uapi/linux/perf_event.h | 2 ++ > tools/perf/util/evsel.c | 2 ++ > tools/perf/util/parse-events.c | 8 ++++++++ > tools/perf/util/parse-events.l | 2 ++ > tools/perf/util/python.c | 2 ++ > 5 files changed, 16 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/tools/include/uapi/linux/perf_event.h > b/tools/include/uapi/linux/perf_event.h > index b1c0b187acfe..fbfb03dff334 100644 > --- a/tools/include/uapi/linux/perf_event.h > +++ b/tools/include/uapi/linux/perf_event.h > @@ -111,6 +111,8 @@ enum perf_sw_ids { > PERF_COUNT_SW_EMULATION_FAULTS = 8, > PERF_COUNT_SW_DUMMY = 9, > PERF_COUNT_SW_BPF_OUTPUT = 10, > + PERF_COUNT_SW_SPF_DONE = 11, > + PERF_COUNT_SW_SPF_FAILED = 12, >
PERF_COUNT_SW_SPF_FAULTS makes sense but not the FAILED one. IIRC, there are no error path counting in perf SW events at the moment. SPF_FAULTS and SPF_FAILS are VM internal events like THP collapse etc. IMHO it should be added as a VM statistics counter or as a trace point event instead.