<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:taxo="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/taxonomy/" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>topic Runtime models based on L1-TLB metrics in Software Tuning, Performance Optimization &amp; Platform Monitoring</title>
    <link>https://community.intel.com/t5/Software-Tuning-Performance/Runtime-models-based-on-L1-TLB-metrics/m-p/1442238#M8135</link>
    <description>&lt;P&gt;We are building a model to predict the CPU runtime of a Haswell Intel Xeon E5-x600 v3 processor using the `perf` tool from the `linux-tools` package and running various benchmarks. The model uses TLB events, including dTLB and sTLB, as predictors. However, the results we obtained were unexpected, as a single-feature model over the same benchmark (and several others) showed a trend opposite to what we anticipated:&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;span class="lia-inline-image-display-wrapper lia-image-align-inline" image-alt="HodB_0-1672233444836.png" style="width: 400px;"&gt;&lt;img src="https://community.intel.com/t5/image/serverpage/image-id/36599i42C7D8F2777EFC0F/image-size/medium?v=v2&amp;amp;px=400&amp;amp;whitelist-exif-data=Orientation%2CResolution%2COriginalDefaultFinalSize%2CCopyright" role="button" title="HodB_0-1672233444836.png" alt="HodB_0-1672233444836.png" /&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P data-private="redact" data-wt-guid="51a352b6-a8f0-4831-bcfe-0dcdad3ccc5c"&gt;&amp;nbsp;We would expect that higher number of hits will lead to decrease in cpu cycles.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P data-private="redact" data-wt-guid="10b72345-3ef9-49b1-b157-7157b17e7890"&gt;&amp;nbsp;Upon further investigation, we realized that we had not considered the out-of-order execution (OOOE) characteristics of the Haswell processor, which includes both retired &lt;SPAN&gt;uops&lt;/SPAN&gt; and speculative events. As our goal is to compare "apples to apples," we want to ensure that we are comparing either retired events to &lt;SPAN&gt;retired&lt;/SPAN&gt; events or speculative events to speculative events. We are now seeking to include &lt;SPAN&gt;speculative&lt;/SPAN&gt; dTLB accesses and &lt;SPAN&gt;retired&lt;/SPAN&gt; sTLB hits in our model to achieve proper predictors.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;SPAN data-issueid="d693359d-b476-48a2-b288-38e568c24ed1" data-testid="issue-underline:Speculative"&gt;speculative&lt;/SPAN&gt; dTLB accesses attempt&lt;/STRONG&gt;: `L1-dcache-loads` and `L1-dcache-stores` counters as potential predictors for speculative dTLB accesses, but we later learned that these counters refer to retired events rather than speculative ones.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P data-private="redact" data-wt-guid="8709f220-14fb-436c-b50a-b699e4f7f6b9"&gt;&lt;SPAN data-issueid="3292e14c-23e3-4720-9e7f-e68217fb4b4c" data-testid="issue-underline:Retired"&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;retired sTLB hits:&lt;/STRONG&gt;&lt;/SPAN&gt; We have been unable to identify a suitable counter for retired sTLB hits out &lt;SPAN&gt;of `perf&lt;/SPAN&gt; –list` options.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Perhaps there is another way to calculate those features indirectly using other counters we hadn't considered&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Wed, 28 Dec 2022 13:17:38 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>HodB</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2022-12-28T13:17:38Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>Runtime models based on L1-TLB metrics</title>
      <link>https://community.intel.com/t5/Software-Tuning-Performance/Runtime-models-based-on-L1-TLB-metrics/m-p/1442238#M8135</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;We are building a model to predict the CPU runtime of a Haswell Intel Xeon E5-x600 v3 processor using the `perf` tool from the `linux-tools` package and running various benchmarks. The model uses TLB events, including dTLB and sTLB, as predictors. However, the results we obtained were unexpected, as a single-feature model over the same benchmark (and several others) showed a trend opposite to what we anticipated:&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;span class="lia-inline-image-display-wrapper lia-image-align-inline" image-alt="HodB_0-1672233444836.png" style="width: 400px;"&gt;&lt;img src="https://community.intel.com/t5/image/serverpage/image-id/36599i42C7D8F2777EFC0F/image-size/medium?v=v2&amp;amp;px=400&amp;amp;whitelist-exif-data=Orientation%2CResolution%2COriginalDefaultFinalSize%2CCopyright" role="button" title="HodB_0-1672233444836.png" alt="HodB_0-1672233444836.png" /&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P data-private="redact" data-wt-guid="51a352b6-a8f0-4831-bcfe-0dcdad3ccc5c"&gt;&amp;nbsp;We would expect that higher number of hits will lead to decrease in cpu cycles.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P data-private="redact" data-wt-guid="10b72345-3ef9-49b1-b157-7157b17e7890"&gt;&amp;nbsp;Upon further investigation, we realized that we had not considered the out-of-order execution (OOOE) characteristics of the Haswell processor, which includes both retired &lt;SPAN&gt;uops&lt;/SPAN&gt; and speculative events. As our goal is to compare "apples to apples," we want to ensure that we are comparing either retired events to &lt;SPAN&gt;retired&lt;/SPAN&gt; events or speculative events to speculative events. We are now seeking to include &lt;SPAN&gt;speculative&lt;/SPAN&gt; dTLB accesses and &lt;SPAN&gt;retired&lt;/SPAN&gt; sTLB hits in our model to achieve proper predictors.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;SPAN data-issueid="d693359d-b476-48a2-b288-38e568c24ed1" data-testid="issue-underline:Speculative"&gt;speculative&lt;/SPAN&gt; dTLB accesses attempt&lt;/STRONG&gt;: `L1-dcache-loads` and `L1-dcache-stores` counters as potential predictors for speculative dTLB accesses, but we later learned that these counters refer to retired events rather than speculative ones.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P data-private="redact" data-wt-guid="8709f220-14fb-436c-b50a-b699e4f7f6b9"&gt;&lt;SPAN data-issueid="3292e14c-23e3-4720-9e7f-e68217fb4b4c" data-testid="issue-underline:Retired"&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;retired sTLB hits:&lt;/STRONG&gt;&lt;/SPAN&gt; We have been unable to identify a suitable counter for retired sTLB hits out &lt;SPAN&gt;of `perf&lt;/SPAN&gt; –list` options.&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;Perhaps there is another way to calculate those features indirectly using other counters we hadn't considered&lt;/P&gt;
&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 28 Dec 2022 13:17:38 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.intel.com/t5/Software-Tuning-Performance/Runtime-models-based-on-L1-TLB-metrics/m-p/1442238#M8135</guid>
      <dc:creator>HodB</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2022-12-28T13:17:38Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

