On 02/13/2017 01:49 AM, Nitesh Konkar wrote:
> On
Fri, Feb 10, 2017 at 3:22 AM, John Ferlan <jferlan(a)redhat.com
> <mailto:jferlan@redhat.com>> wrote:
>
On 01/27/2017 06:01 AM, Nitesh Konkar wrote:
> > This patch adds support and documentation
> > for the page_faults_maj perf event.
>
> > Signed-off-by: Nitesh
Konkar <nitkon12(a)linux.vnet.ibm.com <mailto:
nitkon12(a)linux.vnet.ibm.com>
> > ---
> > docs/formatdomain.html.in <
http://formatdomain.html.in
> | 7 +++++++
> > docs/news.xml | 4 ++--
> > docs/schemas/domaincommon.rng | 1 +
> > include/libvirt/libvirt-domain.h | 10 ++++++++++
> > src/libvirt-domain.c | 3 +++
> > src/qemu/qemu_driver.c | 1 +
> > src/util/virperf.c | 5 ++++-
> > src/util/virperf.h | 1 +
> > tests/genericxml2xmlindata/generic-perf.xml | 1 +
> > tools/virsh.pod | 5 +++++
> > 10 files changed, 35 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
>
>
NB: Similar comments from the page_faults_min...
> > diff --git a/docs/formatdomain.html.in <
http://formatdomain.html.in
>
b/docs/formatdomain.html.in <
http://formatdomain.html.in
>
> index 1857168..50a6bdb 100644
> > --- a/docs/formatdomain.html.in <
http://formatdomain.html.in
> > +++ b/docs/formatdomain.html.in
<
http://formatdomain.html.in
> > @@ -1943,6 +1943,7
@@
> > <event name='context_switches'
enabled='no'/>
> > <event name='cpu_migrations'
enabled='no'/>
> > <event name='page_faults_min'
enabled='no'/>
> > + <event name='page_faults_maj'
enabled='no'/>
> > </perf>
> > ...
> > </pre
> > @@ -2052,6 +2053,12
@@
> > platform</td
>
> <td><code>perf.page_faults_min</code></td
> > </tr
>
> + <tr
> > +
<td><code>page_faults_maj</code></td
>
> + <td>the count of major page faults by applications running
on the
> > + platform</td
>
> + <td><code>perf.page_faults_maj</code></td
> > + </tr
> As already noted in patch 3... is maj+min the same as
what patch 3
> provides?
> maj+min is not always exactly
the same as page faults. Sometimes there
> is a small offset
> value.
> Eg: perf record -a
--event={page-faults,major-faults,minor-faults}
> 47
> page-faults
> 0
> major-faults
> 46 minor-faults
> Offset by 1
> Eg: virsh domstats --perf
> Domain: 'Fedora'
> perf.page_faults=890
> perf.page_faults_min=890
> perf.page_faults_maj=0
> Here maj+min=page_faults
> Thus are all necessary?
> I am not sure on this part. Probably yes as we dont want
> the user to add min+maj to get (approx)total page faults.
I don't mind all 3 being present... still if I'm going to ask the
question, then someone getting the stats will ask the question... they
may also wonder why maj+min != total.
Perhaps something you could dig deeper on with the kernel code
descriptions that are setting the value.
My assumption is it's the "time" of the sample. That is a total page
fault could have been counted even though it hadn't been counted as a
maj or min page fault.
I looked into the kernel code in /arch/x86/mm/fault.c and also confirmed
from
the #perf IRC that maj+min != total is valid. This is because not all
page faults fall in maj/min category. Some maybe invalid page
faults(invalid address generated)
whereas some pagefaults after occuring are not serviced due to lock
contention
so as to avoid a deadlock at that instance, thus being counted in total but
not in min/maj faults.
Also, shd i follow the comment pattern as shown
in ur patch under review, in /virsh.pod ?
Thnx.
John