3 ms·

im pretty sure performance counters count accurately. theyre a bit finnicky to use but they dont alter cpu execution. last i had to deal with it.. which was eo

• mrjay42 1y ago
  Last time I checked, Intel's MSRs (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Model-specific_register https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Model-specific_register) allow Intel PCM (https://github.com/intel/pcm https://github.com/intel/pcm) to work, are indeed used to profile, or "measure performance" (sorry if my vocabulary is not the most accurate). Last time I checked the code of Intel PCM, it still relies on hardcoded values for each CPU which are as close as possible to reality but are still an estimation. It doesn't mean that you get wrong measurements, it means there's a level of inaccuracy that has to be accepted. BTW, I am aware that Intel PCM is not a profiler, and more of a measurement tool, however you CAN you use it to 'profile' your program and see how it behaves in terms of computing and memory utilization (with deep analysis of cache behavior (cache hit, cache miss, etc.))
• hinkley 1y ago
  They don’t count cache eviction, memory pressure, or GC time being attributed to consumers of data instead of producers. Or sometimes consistently to barely involved function calls. When a task has a certain shape and occupies more than half of the heap size in the middle, it’s often the case that the cleanup code or teardown code gets blamed for the cost. The only real performance improvement available is to go stop the mess at the source.