Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: jgd@cix.co.uk (John Dallman)
Newsgroups: comp.arch
Subject: Re: Performance monitoring (was: Efficiency of in-order vs. OoO)
Date: Tue, 26 Mar 2024 17:29 +0000 (GMT Standard Time)
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 18
Message-ID: <memo.20240326172954.1408K@jgd.cix.co.uk>
References: <2024Mar26.174702@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at>
Reply-To: jgd@cix.co.uk
Injection-Date: Tue, 26 Mar 2024 17:29:53 +0100 (CET)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="8d52a550451f0c06704260c56212c0e8";
	logging-data="2055975"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1962BN/A27M0iuy8of225lSwFJqP6GMMLM="
Cancel-Lock: sha1:ENZdNK6xcIsa8xbfqiaWvX9VRcI=
Bytes: 1653

In article <2024Mar26.174702@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at>,
anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) wrote:
> scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) writes:
> >Their target is not application analysis.
> 
> This sounds like hardware folks that are only concerned with
> memory-bound programs.

There can be considerable confusion on this point. In the early days of
Intel VTune, it would only work on small and simple programs, but Intel
sent one of the lead developers to visit the UK with it, expecting that
it would instantly find huge speed-ups in my employers' code. 

What happened was that VTune crashed almost instantly when faced with
something that large, and Intel learned about the difference between
microarchitecture analysis and application analysis. 

John