Re: [perfmon2] perfmon2 CPU_CLK_UNHALTED:REF_P count error

SourceForge Headquarters 225 Broadway Suite 1600 San Diego, CA 92101 +1 (858) 454-5900

Here is the result on my IVB laptop:

I run some cycle burning workload on CPU0:

$ taskset -c 0 noploop &
$ sudo syst_count -e unhalted_reference_cycles,unhalted_core_cycles -p
-d 10 -c 0
<press CTRL-C to quit before 10s time limit>
# 1s -----
CPU0   G0         2 594 304 518        2 594 304 518
unhalted_reference_cycles (scaling 0,00%, ena=1 000 736 581, run=1 000
736 581)
CPU0   G0         2 594 304 951        2 594 304 951
unhalted_core_cycles (scaling 0,00%, ena=1 000 736 581, run=1 000 736
581)
# 2s -----
CPU0   G0         5 188 602 874        2 594 298 356
unhalted_reference_cycles (scaling 0,00%, ena=2 001 469 769, run=2 001
469 769)
CPU0   G0         5 188 604 369        2 594 299 418
unhalted_core_cycles (scaling 0,00%, ena=2 001 469 769, run=2 001 469
769)

As you can see, we are in the billions. Also this shows that my
core-i5 does not have Turbo mode.
ref cycles = core cycles.

On Thu, Dec 4, 2014 at 3:16 AM, Sun, Yongjie <yon...@in...> wrote:
> Can you show me the result in your server? And your CPU?
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Stephane Eranian [mailto:er...@go...]
> Sent: Thursday, December 4, 2014 10:12 AM
> To: Sun, Yongjie
> Cc: per...@li...
> Subject: Re: [perfmon2] perfmon2 CPU_CLK_UNHALTED:REF_P count error
>
> On Thu, Dec 4, 2014 at 3:09 AM, Sun, Yongjie <yon...@in...> wrote:
>> Dmesg output:
>>
>> Performance Events: PEBS fmt1+, SandyBridge events, Intel PMU driver.
>> PAX: PMU arbitration service v1.0.1 has been started.
>> sep3_10: PMU collection driver v3.10.3 (EMON INTERNAL) has been loaded.
>> sep3_10: IDT vector 0x40 will be used for handling PMU interrupts.
>> clearing PMU state on CPU#15
>> clearing PMU state on CPU#8
>>
>>
>> syst_count output:  same like:
>>
>> CPU0   G0             8,886,925            8,886,925 unhalted_core_cycles (scaling 0.00%, ena=1,000,291,924, run=1,000,291,924)
>> CPU0   G0                     0                    0 unhalted_reference_cycles (scaling 0.00%, ena=1,000,291,924, run=1,000,291,924)
>
> I think both counts are too low. In 1s you got on 9 million cycles.....
> If the cpu is really busy it should be in the billions.
> So something is broken.
> Can you reboot your system AND NOT load the sep driver (VTUNE) and rerun the test?
>
>> # 1s -----
>> CPU1   G0             2,955,018            2,955,018 unhalted_core_cycles (scaling 0.00%, ena=1,000,319,397, run=1,000,319,397)
>> CPU1   G0                     0                    0 unhalted_reference_cycles (scaling 0.00%, ena=1,000,319,397, run=1,000,319,397)
>> # 1s -----
>> CPU2   G0               162,771              162,771 unhalted_core_cycles (scaling 0.00%, ena=1,000,317,563, run=1,000,317,563)
>> CPU2   G0                     0                    0 unhalted_reference_cycles (scaling 0.00%, ena=1,000,317,563, run=1,000,317,563)
>> # 1s -----
>> CPU3   G0               318,645              318,645 unhalted_core_cycles (scaling 0.00%, ena=1,000,314,571, run=1,000,314,571)
>> CPU3   G0                     0                    0 unhalted_reference_cycles (scaling 0.00%, ena=1,000,314,571, run=1,000,314,571)
>> # 1s -----
>> CPU4   G0               160,486              160,486 unhalted_core_cycles (scaling 0.00%, ena=1,000,312,981, run=1,000,312,981)
>> CPU4   G0                     0                    0 unhalted_reference_cycles (scaling 0.00%, ena=1,000,312,981, run=1,000,312,981)
>> # 1s -----
>> CPU5   G0               448,774              448,774 unhalted_core_cycles (scaling 0.00%, ena=1,000,311,395, run=1,000,311,395)
>> CPU5   G0                     0                    0 unhalted_reference_cycles (scaling 0.00%, ena=1,000,311,395, run=1,000,311,395)
>> # 1s -----
>> CPU6   G0               149,396              149,396 unhalted_core_cycles (scaling 0.00%, ena=1,000,307,538, run=1,000,307,538)
>> CPU6   G0                     0                    0 unhalted_reference_cycles (scaling 0.00%, ena=1,000,307,538, run=1,000,307,538)
>> # 1s -----
>> CPU7   G0               417,315              417,315 unhalted_core_cycles (scaling 0.00%, ena=1,000,303,946, run=1,000,303,946)
>> CPU7   G0                     0                    0 unhalted_reference_cycles (scaling 0.00%, ena=1,000,303,946, run=1,000,303,946)
>> # 1s -----
>> CPU8   G0               720,604              720,604 unhalted_core_cycles (scaling 0.00%, ena=1,000,270,014, run=1,000,270,014)
>> CPU8   G0                     0                    0 unhalted_reference_cycles (scaling 0.00%, ena=1,000,270,014, run=1,000,270,014)
>> # 1s -----
>> CPU9   G0             1,556,507            1,556,507 unhalted_core_cycles (scaling 0.00%, ena=1,000,266,053, run=1,000,266,053)
>> CPU9   G0                     0                    0 unhalted_reference_cycles (scaling 0.00%, ena=1,000,266,053, run=1,000,266,053)
>> # 1s -----
>> CPU10  G0            14,548,713           14,548,713 unhalted_core_cycles (scaling 0.00%, ena=1,000,266,471, run=1,000,266,471)
>> CPU10  G0                     0                    0 unhalted_reference_cycles (scaling 0.00%, ena=1,000,266,471, run=1,000,266,471)
>> # 1s -----
>> CPU11  G0               158,015              158,015 unhalted_core_cycles (scaling 0.00%, ena=1,000,261,804, run=1,000,261,804)
>> CPU11  G0                     0                    0 unhalted_reference_cycles (scaling 0.00%, ena=1,000,261,804, run=1,000,261,804)
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Stephane Eranian [mailto:er...@go...]
>> Sent: Thursday, December 4, 2014 9:48 AM
>> To: Sun, Yongjie
>> Cc: per...@li...
>> Subject: Re: [perfmon2] perfmon2 CPU_CLK_UNHALTED:REF_P count error
>>
>> hi
>>
>> On Thu, Dec 4, 2014 at 2:46 AM, Sun, Yongjie <yon...@in...> wrote:
>>>
>>> I have tried many os like Ubuntu, centos..
>>> Kernel versio is: both are the same result 3.5.0-49-generic
>>> 2.6.32-358.el6.x86_64
>>>
>> Send me the output of:
>> sudo LIBPFM_VERBOSE=1 ./syst_count -e
>> unhalted_core_cycles,unhalted_ref_cycles -p -d10
>>
>> Also the output of: dmesg | fgrep PMU
>>
>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Stephane Eranian [mailto:er...@go...]
>>> Sent: Thursday, December 4, 2014 9:44 AM
>>> To: Sun, Yongjie
>>> Cc: per...@li...
>>> Subject: Re: [perfmon2] perfmon2 CPU_CLK_UNHALTED:REF_P count error
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> On Thu, Dec 4, 2014 at 2:39 AM, Sun, Yongjie <yon...@in...> wrote:
>>>> Current the issue is: the CPU_CLK_UNHALTED:REF_P couted value is too small than CPU_CLK_UNHALTED:THREAD_P.  is it right?  From my understanding, it should be almost same. It is none of the workload business.
>>>>
>>> Which kernel is this running on?
>>> UNHALTED_REF_CYCLES can only be measured on a fixed counter. So need kernel support for this.
>>>
>>>
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: Stephane Eranian [mailto:er...@go...]
>>>> Sent: Thursday, December 4, 2014 9:35 AM
>>>> To: Sun, Yongjie
>>>> Cc: per...@li...
>>>> Subject: Re: [perfmon2] perfmon2 CPU_CLK_UNHALTED:REF_P count error
>>>>
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, Dec 4, 2014 at 2:31 AM, Sun, Yongjie <yon...@in...> wrote:
>>>>> I try use the syst_count:
>>>>> Result is same
>>>>>
>>>>> CPU0   G0             7,188,625            7,188,625 UNHALTED_CORE_CYCLES (scaling 0.00%, ena=1,999,298,896, run=1,999,298,896)
>>>>> CPU0   G0                     3                    3 UNHALTED_REFERENCE_CYCLES (scaling 0.00%, ena=1,999,336,546, run=1,999,336,546)
>>>>> CPU0   G0             7,303,052            7,303,052 CPU_CLK_UNHALTED:THREAD_P (scaling 0.00%, ena=1,999,348,997, run=1,999,348,997)
>>>>> CPU0   G0               545,254              545,254 CPU_CLK_UNHALTED:REF_P (scaling 0.00%, ena=1,999,364,938, run=1,999,364,938)
>>>>>
>>>> But what is your workload doing and on which CPU does it run.
>>>> Here it needs to run on CPU0. If you workload blocks and there is nothing else to run on CPU0, the processor goes in halted state, and the events you are measuring stop counting.
>>>>
>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>> From: Stephane Eranian [mailto:er...@go...]
>>>>> Sent: Thursday, December 4, 2014 9:25 AM
>>>>> To: Sun, Yongjie
>>>>> Cc: per...@li...
>>>>> Subject: Re: [perfmon2] perfmon2 CPU_CLK_UNHALTED:REF_P count error
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>
>>>>> These Python scripts are all not maintained.
>>>>> I suggest you use the perf_examples/syst_count program instead.
>>>>> And you need to be root to run per-CPU (system-wide) measurments.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Thu, Dec 4, 2014 at 1:34 AM, Sun, Yongjie <yon...@in...> wrote:
>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>> I running on  Intel  SNB E5-2680
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I just used the "libpfm-4.5.0/python/sys.py"
>>>>>> ./sys.py -e
>>>>>> UNHALTED_CORE_CYCLES,UNHALTED_REFERENCE_CYCLES,CPU_CLK_UNHALTED:TH
>>>>>> R
>>>>>> E
>>>>>> A
>>>>>> D
>>>>>> _P,CPU_CLK_UNHALTED:REF_P -c 0
>>>>>> Result:
>>>>>> CPU0: UNHALTED_CORE_CYCLES      3229292
>>>>>> CPU0: UNHALTED_REFERENCE_CYCLES 3
>>>>>> CPU0: CPU_CLK_UNHALTED:THREAD_P 3266550
>>>>>> CPU0: CPU_CLK_UNHALTED:REF_P    268798
>>>>>> CPU0: UNHALTED_CORE_CYCLES      6834444
>>>>>> CPU0: UNHALTED_REFERENCE_CYCLES 3
>>>>>> CPU0: CPU_CLK_UNHALTED:THREAD_P 6897896
>>>>>> CPU0: CPU_CLK_UNHALTED:REF_P    568677
>>>>>> CPU0: UNHALTED_CORE_CYCLES      10782920
>>>>>> CPU0: UNHALTED_REFERENCE_CYCLES 3
>>>>>> CPU0: CPU_CLK_UNHALTED:THREAD_P 10876957
>>>>>> CPU0: CPU_CLK_UNHALTED:REF_P    897739
>>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>>> From: Stephane Eranian [mailto:er...@go...]
>>>>>> Sent: Wednesday, December 3, 2014 12:33 AM
>>>>>> To: Sun, Yongjie
>>>>>> Cc: per...@li...
>>>>>> Subject: Re: [perfmon2] perfmon2 CPU_CLK_UNHALTED:REF_P count
>>>>>> error
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Mon, Dec 1, 2014 at 6:24 AM, Sun, Yongjie <yon...@in...> wrote:
>>>>>>> Hi, all
>>>>>>>    I use the perfmon2 to count events
>>>>>>> “UNHALTED_CORE_CYCLES,UNHALTED_REFERENCE_CYCLES,CPU_CLK_UNHALTED:THREAD_P,CPU_CLK_UNHALTED:REF_P”
>>>>>>> and got
>>>>>>
>>>>>> which CPU is this running on?
>>>>>> How long does your test run?
>>>>>> Are you running in system-wide or per-process mode?
>>>>>> Need more context to answer your question.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> CPU0: UNHALTED_CORE_CYCLES      5538707
>>>>>>> CPU0: UNHALTED_REFERENCE_CYCLES 3
>>>>>>> CPU0: CPU_CLK_UNHALTED:THREAD_P 5641229
>>>>>>> CPU0: CPU_CLK_UNHALTED:REF_P    419607
>>>>>>> CPU0: UNHALTED_CORE_CYCLES      11661876
>>>>>>> CPU0: UNHALTED_REFERENCE_CYCLES 3
>>>>>>> CPU0: CPU_CLK_UNHALTED:THREAD_P 11813664
>>>>>>> CPU0: CPU_CLK_UNHALTED:REF_P    911248
>>>>>>> CPU0: UNHALTED_CORE_CYCLES      15682069
>>>>>>> CPU0: UNHALTED_REFERENCE_CYCLES 3
>>>>>>> CPU0: CPU_CLK_UNHALTED:THREAD_P 15869779
>>>>>>> CPU0: CPU_CLK_UNHALTED:REF_P    1246315
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Two questions: 1. why UNHALTED_REFERENCE_CYCLES is 3?  Too small
>>>>>>>              2. why  CPU0: CPU_CLK_UNHALTED:REF_P is much smaller
>>>>>>> than CPU_CLK_UNHALTED:THREAD_P? this do not make sence!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> BTW: I count this for I want to count the CPU Frequency from Intel’s DOC:
>>>>>>> https://software.intel.com/en-us/articles/measuring-the-average-u
>>>>>>> n
>>>>>>> h
>>>>>>> a
>>>>>>> l
>>>>>>> t
>>>>>>> ed-frequency
>>>>>>> Average frequency =
>>>>>>> TSC_frequency * (CPU_CLK_UNHALTED.THREAD / CPU_CLK_UNHALTED.REF)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> So can anybody help on this question?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> -----------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>>> -
>>>>>>> -
>>>>>>> -
>>>>>>> -
>>>>>>> -
>>>>>>> -------- Download BIRT iHub F-Type - The Free Enterprise-Grade
>>>>>>> BIRT Server from Actuate! Instantly Supercharge Your Business
>>>>>>> Reports and Dashboards with Interactivity, Sharing, Native Excel
>>>>>>> Exports, App Integration & more Get technology previously
>>>>>>> reserved for billion-dollar corporations, FREE
>>>>>>> http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=157005751&iu=/4140/ostg.
>>>>>>> clktrk _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> perfmon2-devel mailing list
>>>>>>> per...@li...
>>>>>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/perfmon2-devel
>>>>>>>