Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Updating papi_events.csv to support addition of L1I_CACHE in libpfm4 #296

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

Treece-Burgess
Copy link
Contributor

@Treece-Burgess Treece-Burgess commented Dec 18, 2024

Pull Request Description

This PR replaces the event L1I_CACHE_ACCESS in papi_events.csv with the event L1I_CACHE for Neoverse N1, N2, N3, V1, and V2. For more information on the addition of L1I_CACHE see PR #295.

Testing took place only on a Neoverse V2 as the PAPI team currently does not have access to a Neoverse N1, N2, N3 or V1.
For testing, the presets events used were PAPI_L1_ICA, PAPI_L1_ICH, PAPI_L1_TCA, and PAPI_L1_TCHas they are directly affected by this change.

Output for papi_avail

The output is identical.

Output for papi_command_line

The output for the four events looks roughly identical.

Author Checklist

  • Description
    Why this PR exists. Reference all relevant information, including background, issues, test failures, etc
  • Commits
    Commits are self contained and only do one thing
    Commits have a header of the form: module: short description
    Commits have a body (whenever relevant) containing a detailed description of the addressed problem and its solution
  • Tests
    The PR needs to pass all the tests

…tion of L1I_CACHE_ACCESS in libpfm4.

Testing took place on a Neoverse V2 by comparing output from the commit
prior to the addition of L1I_CACHE and the commit that adds L1I_CACHE.

- Output for papi_avail was identical
- Output for papi_command_line for the events PAPI_L1_ICA, PAPI_L1_ICH,
  PAPI_L1_TCA, and PAPI_L1_TCH was roughly identical.
@Treece-Burgess Treece-Burgess self-assigned this Dec 18, 2024
@Treece-Burgess
Copy link
Contributor Author

Note that PR #295 must be merged before PR #296 as the proposed changes introduced in 296 rely on 295.

@Treece-Burgess Treece-Burgess added status-ready-for-review PR is ready to be reviewed update-presets PRs related to updating the PAPI presets priority-normal PRs and Issues that are of normal priority labels Dec 18, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
priority-normal PRs and Issues that are of normal priority status-ready-for-review PR is ready to be reviewed update-presets PRs related to updating the PAPI presets
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant