why does the results of reading hardware counters with papi depend on PAPI_library_init position?2019 Community Moderator ElectionWhy does printf not flush after the call unless a newline is in the format string?Why does sizeof(x++) not increment x?Why does the C preprocessor interpret the word “linux” as the constant “1”?Why does ENOENT mean “No such file or directory”?Trouble reading and writing to files in CPAPI Counter IssuesGET COUNTERS with Intel trace Collector&Analyzer and PAPIMonitor performance counters of running process using papiperformance counters values return zero using papi attachInstalling papi on virtualbox(use counters on virtual machine )

Why are there no stars visible in cislunar space?

DisplayForm problem with pi in FractionBox

What kind of footwear is suitable for walking in micro gravity environment?

What is the difference between something being completely legal and being completely decriminalized?

PTIJ: Which Dr. Seuss books should one obtain?

Is there any common country to visit for uk and schengen visa?

What are the consequences of changing the number of hours in a day?

How old is Nick Fury?

When did hardware antialiasing start being available?

What is 管理しきれず?

What is it called when someone votes for an option that's not their first choice?

Why is indicated airspeed rather than ground speed used during the takeoff roll?

Air travel with refrigerated insulin

Do I need to convey a moral for each of my blog post?

Knife as defense against stray dogs

Why didn’t Eve recognize the little cockroach as a living organism?

Why is there so much iron?

PTIJ: At the Passover Seder, is one allowed to speak more than once during Maggid?

Should a narrator ever describe things based on a characters view instead of fact?

What will the Frenchman say?

Why is this tree refusing to shed its dead leaves?

Determine voltage drop over 10G resistors with cheap multimeter

Weird lines in Microsoft Word

How to test the sharpness of a knife?



why does the results of reading hardware counters with papi depend on PAPI_library_init position?



2019 Community Moderator ElectionWhy does printf not flush after the call unless a newline is in the format string?Why does sizeof(x++) not increment x?Why does the C preprocessor interpret the word “linux” as the constant “1”?Why does ENOENT mean “No such file or directory”?Trouble reading and writing to files in CPAPI Counter IssuesGET COUNTERS with Intel trace Collector&Analyzer and PAPIMonitor performance counters of running process using papiperformance counters values return zero using papi attachInstalling papi on virtualbox(use counters on virtual machine )










1















I am using PAPI library for reading hardware counters. I have noticed that the order of calling PAPI_library_init(PAPI_VER_CURRENT) initialization has an influence on the results I get. My initialization and read of the array is like this:



int retval;

/*
retval = PAPI_library_init(PAPI_VER_CURRENT);

if (retval != PAPI_VER_CURRENT)
fprintf(stderr, "PAPI library init error!n");
exit(1);

*/

for(int i=0; i < arr_size; i++)
array[i].value = 1;
//_mm_clflush(&array[i]); flushing does not make difference.

_mm_mfence();


for(int i=0; i < arr_size; i++)
temp = array[i].value ;

_mm_mfence();



retval = PAPI_library_init(PAPI_VER_CURRENT);

if (retval != PAPI_VER_CURRENT)
fprintf(stderr, "PAPI library init error!n");
exit(1);



The necessity of second loop to read the array is for coherence protocol I believe but it should not be a big deal here. After this, I add native events of MEM_LOAD_RETIRED to the Eventset I want to read and I use PAPI_read around this third loop (I read it before and after the loop and at the end print the difference) :



for(int i=0; i < arr_size; i++)
temp = array[i].value ;



where arr_size is 1000 and each element of the array is 64 byte size(equal to cache line). I have disabled all the prefetchers . I compile with gcc -O3 flag for optimization and -lpapi library. with this code, for third loop I get:



L1_HIT: 64, L1_MISS: 1011, L2_HIT: 15, L2_MISS: 996.



However if I uncomment PAPI_library_init before the array initialization and comment it after, the results I get is:



L1_HIT: 73, L1_MISS: 1004, L2_HIT: 990, L2_MISS: 14.



I am testing this in skylake server, cache sizes are:



L1d cache: 32K
L1i cache: 32K
L2 cache: 1024K
L3 cache: 22528K


Now I am a bit confused why would papi initialization influence this results. it's L2 hit and miss that change. All I need is third loop, and the effect of first two loop on counters is not taken into account, I believe.



So any hint for this would be helpful as all the documentation says is this: "PAPI_library_init() initializes the PAPI library. It must be called before any low level PAPI functions can be used. If your application is making use of threads PAPI_thread_init (3) must also be called prior to making any calls to the library other than PAPI_library_init()."










share|improve this question
























  • Can you check without _mm_clflush(&array[i]);? Can you check for smaller array sizes such as 500 and 300 elements instead of 1000? Did you have qualify the array declaration with volatile so that the compiler won't optimize away the loads at -O3?

    – Hadi Brais
    Mar 7 at 18:20











  • @HadiBrais Yes I have volatile array so reading in temp won't be optimized. I will check without flush. now I am sure I will get the same result but I will try

    – Ana Khorguani
    Mar 7 at 18:30












  • @HadiBrais yes I have the same behavior without clflush. Just to make sure, this first loop, when I initialize array, it writes first time in the element and then evicts this cache line right? I did not suspect this before but I tested it today and surprisingly this is the observation I got. I read about on demand zeroing in another post, which as I understood was the reason of RFO case right? So is it somehow related to cache line eviction too?

    – Ana Khorguani
    Mar 7 at 18:37











  • for 500, initialization of PAPI after, gives result: L1_HIT: 62, L1_MISS: 513, L2_HIT: 16, L2_MISS: 497, and initializing before: L1_HIT: 67, L1_MISS: 510, L2_HIT: 377, L2_MISS: 133. seems to be same behavior. It's same for 300. After initialization: L1_HIT: 83, L1_MISS: 304, L2_HIT: 6, L2_MISS: 298. initializing before array: L1_HIT: 82, L1_MISS: 302, L2_HIT: 117, L2_MISS: 185,

    – Ana Khorguani
    Mar 7 at 18:48











  • It is as if PAPI_library_init is causing all the L2 lines to be evicted. Looking at the source code, I don't see why would this happen. What about MEM_LOAD_RETIRED.L3_MISS and MEM_LOAD_RETIRED.L3_HIT?

    – Hadi Brais
    Mar 7 at 18:58















1















I am using PAPI library for reading hardware counters. I have noticed that the order of calling PAPI_library_init(PAPI_VER_CURRENT) initialization has an influence on the results I get. My initialization and read of the array is like this:



int retval;

/*
retval = PAPI_library_init(PAPI_VER_CURRENT);

if (retval != PAPI_VER_CURRENT)
fprintf(stderr, "PAPI library init error!n");
exit(1);

*/

for(int i=0; i < arr_size; i++)
array[i].value = 1;
//_mm_clflush(&array[i]); flushing does not make difference.

_mm_mfence();


for(int i=0; i < arr_size; i++)
temp = array[i].value ;

_mm_mfence();



retval = PAPI_library_init(PAPI_VER_CURRENT);

if (retval != PAPI_VER_CURRENT)
fprintf(stderr, "PAPI library init error!n");
exit(1);



The necessity of second loop to read the array is for coherence protocol I believe but it should not be a big deal here. After this, I add native events of MEM_LOAD_RETIRED to the Eventset I want to read and I use PAPI_read around this third loop (I read it before and after the loop and at the end print the difference) :



for(int i=0; i < arr_size; i++)
temp = array[i].value ;



where arr_size is 1000 and each element of the array is 64 byte size(equal to cache line). I have disabled all the prefetchers . I compile with gcc -O3 flag for optimization and -lpapi library. with this code, for third loop I get:



L1_HIT: 64, L1_MISS: 1011, L2_HIT: 15, L2_MISS: 996.



However if I uncomment PAPI_library_init before the array initialization and comment it after, the results I get is:



L1_HIT: 73, L1_MISS: 1004, L2_HIT: 990, L2_MISS: 14.



I am testing this in skylake server, cache sizes are:



L1d cache: 32K
L1i cache: 32K
L2 cache: 1024K
L3 cache: 22528K


Now I am a bit confused why would papi initialization influence this results. it's L2 hit and miss that change. All I need is third loop, and the effect of first two loop on counters is not taken into account, I believe.



So any hint for this would be helpful as all the documentation says is this: "PAPI_library_init() initializes the PAPI library. It must be called before any low level PAPI functions can be used. If your application is making use of threads PAPI_thread_init (3) must also be called prior to making any calls to the library other than PAPI_library_init()."










share|improve this question
























  • Can you check without _mm_clflush(&array[i]);? Can you check for smaller array sizes such as 500 and 300 elements instead of 1000? Did you have qualify the array declaration with volatile so that the compiler won't optimize away the loads at -O3?

    – Hadi Brais
    Mar 7 at 18:20











  • @HadiBrais Yes I have volatile array so reading in temp won't be optimized. I will check without flush. now I am sure I will get the same result but I will try

    – Ana Khorguani
    Mar 7 at 18:30












  • @HadiBrais yes I have the same behavior without clflush. Just to make sure, this first loop, when I initialize array, it writes first time in the element and then evicts this cache line right? I did not suspect this before but I tested it today and surprisingly this is the observation I got. I read about on demand zeroing in another post, which as I understood was the reason of RFO case right? So is it somehow related to cache line eviction too?

    – Ana Khorguani
    Mar 7 at 18:37











  • for 500, initialization of PAPI after, gives result: L1_HIT: 62, L1_MISS: 513, L2_HIT: 16, L2_MISS: 497, and initializing before: L1_HIT: 67, L1_MISS: 510, L2_HIT: 377, L2_MISS: 133. seems to be same behavior. It's same for 300. After initialization: L1_HIT: 83, L1_MISS: 304, L2_HIT: 6, L2_MISS: 298. initializing before array: L1_HIT: 82, L1_MISS: 302, L2_HIT: 117, L2_MISS: 185,

    – Ana Khorguani
    Mar 7 at 18:48











  • It is as if PAPI_library_init is causing all the L2 lines to be evicted. Looking at the source code, I don't see why would this happen. What about MEM_LOAD_RETIRED.L3_MISS and MEM_LOAD_RETIRED.L3_HIT?

    – Hadi Brais
    Mar 7 at 18:58













1












1








1








I am using PAPI library for reading hardware counters. I have noticed that the order of calling PAPI_library_init(PAPI_VER_CURRENT) initialization has an influence on the results I get. My initialization and read of the array is like this:



int retval;

/*
retval = PAPI_library_init(PAPI_VER_CURRENT);

if (retval != PAPI_VER_CURRENT)
fprintf(stderr, "PAPI library init error!n");
exit(1);

*/

for(int i=0; i < arr_size; i++)
array[i].value = 1;
//_mm_clflush(&array[i]); flushing does not make difference.

_mm_mfence();


for(int i=0; i < arr_size; i++)
temp = array[i].value ;

_mm_mfence();



retval = PAPI_library_init(PAPI_VER_CURRENT);

if (retval != PAPI_VER_CURRENT)
fprintf(stderr, "PAPI library init error!n");
exit(1);



The necessity of second loop to read the array is for coherence protocol I believe but it should not be a big deal here. After this, I add native events of MEM_LOAD_RETIRED to the Eventset I want to read and I use PAPI_read around this third loop (I read it before and after the loop and at the end print the difference) :



for(int i=0; i < arr_size; i++)
temp = array[i].value ;



where arr_size is 1000 and each element of the array is 64 byte size(equal to cache line). I have disabled all the prefetchers . I compile with gcc -O3 flag for optimization and -lpapi library. with this code, for third loop I get:



L1_HIT: 64, L1_MISS: 1011, L2_HIT: 15, L2_MISS: 996.



However if I uncomment PAPI_library_init before the array initialization and comment it after, the results I get is:



L1_HIT: 73, L1_MISS: 1004, L2_HIT: 990, L2_MISS: 14.



I am testing this in skylake server, cache sizes are:



L1d cache: 32K
L1i cache: 32K
L2 cache: 1024K
L3 cache: 22528K


Now I am a bit confused why would papi initialization influence this results. it's L2 hit and miss that change. All I need is third loop, and the effect of first two loop on counters is not taken into account, I believe.



So any hint for this would be helpful as all the documentation says is this: "PAPI_library_init() initializes the PAPI library. It must be called before any low level PAPI functions can be used. If your application is making use of threads PAPI_thread_init (3) must also be called prior to making any calls to the library other than PAPI_library_init()."










share|improve this question
















I am using PAPI library for reading hardware counters. I have noticed that the order of calling PAPI_library_init(PAPI_VER_CURRENT) initialization has an influence on the results I get. My initialization and read of the array is like this:



int retval;

/*
retval = PAPI_library_init(PAPI_VER_CURRENT);

if (retval != PAPI_VER_CURRENT)
fprintf(stderr, "PAPI library init error!n");
exit(1);

*/

for(int i=0; i < arr_size; i++)
array[i].value = 1;
//_mm_clflush(&array[i]); flushing does not make difference.

_mm_mfence();


for(int i=0; i < arr_size; i++)
temp = array[i].value ;

_mm_mfence();



retval = PAPI_library_init(PAPI_VER_CURRENT);

if (retval != PAPI_VER_CURRENT)
fprintf(stderr, "PAPI library init error!n");
exit(1);



The necessity of second loop to read the array is for coherence protocol I believe but it should not be a big deal here. After this, I add native events of MEM_LOAD_RETIRED to the Eventset I want to read and I use PAPI_read around this third loop (I read it before and after the loop and at the end print the difference) :



for(int i=0; i < arr_size; i++)
temp = array[i].value ;



where arr_size is 1000 and each element of the array is 64 byte size(equal to cache line). I have disabled all the prefetchers . I compile with gcc -O3 flag for optimization and -lpapi library. with this code, for third loop I get:



L1_HIT: 64, L1_MISS: 1011, L2_HIT: 15, L2_MISS: 996.



However if I uncomment PAPI_library_init before the array initialization and comment it after, the results I get is:



L1_HIT: 73, L1_MISS: 1004, L2_HIT: 990, L2_MISS: 14.



I am testing this in skylake server, cache sizes are:



L1d cache: 32K
L1i cache: 32K
L2 cache: 1024K
L3 cache: 22528K


Now I am a bit confused why would papi initialization influence this results. it's L2 hit and miss that change. All I need is third loop, and the effect of first two loop on counters is not taken into account, I believe.



So any hint for this would be helpful as all the documentation says is this: "PAPI_library_init() initializes the PAPI library. It must be called before any low level PAPI functions can be used. If your application is making use of threads PAPI_thread_init (3) must also be called prior to making any calls to the library other than PAPI_library_init()."







c caching x86 papi






share|improve this question















share|improve this question













share|improve this question




share|improve this question








edited Mar 7 at 18:50







Ana Khorguani

















asked Mar 7 at 10:35









Ana KhorguaniAna Khorguani

1097




1097












  • Can you check without _mm_clflush(&array[i]);? Can you check for smaller array sizes such as 500 and 300 elements instead of 1000? Did you have qualify the array declaration with volatile so that the compiler won't optimize away the loads at -O3?

    – Hadi Brais
    Mar 7 at 18:20











  • @HadiBrais Yes I have volatile array so reading in temp won't be optimized. I will check without flush. now I am sure I will get the same result but I will try

    – Ana Khorguani
    Mar 7 at 18:30












  • @HadiBrais yes I have the same behavior without clflush. Just to make sure, this first loop, when I initialize array, it writes first time in the element and then evicts this cache line right? I did not suspect this before but I tested it today and surprisingly this is the observation I got. I read about on demand zeroing in another post, which as I understood was the reason of RFO case right? So is it somehow related to cache line eviction too?

    – Ana Khorguani
    Mar 7 at 18:37











  • for 500, initialization of PAPI after, gives result: L1_HIT: 62, L1_MISS: 513, L2_HIT: 16, L2_MISS: 497, and initializing before: L1_HIT: 67, L1_MISS: 510, L2_HIT: 377, L2_MISS: 133. seems to be same behavior. It's same for 300. After initialization: L1_HIT: 83, L1_MISS: 304, L2_HIT: 6, L2_MISS: 298. initializing before array: L1_HIT: 82, L1_MISS: 302, L2_HIT: 117, L2_MISS: 185,

    – Ana Khorguani
    Mar 7 at 18:48











  • It is as if PAPI_library_init is causing all the L2 lines to be evicted. Looking at the source code, I don't see why would this happen. What about MEM_LOAD_RETIRED.L3_MISS and MEM_LOAD_RETIRED.L3_HIT?

    – Hadi Brais
    Mar 7 at 18:58

















  • Can you check without _mm_clflush(&array[i]);? Can you check for smaller array sizes such as 500 and 300 elements instead of 1000? Did you have qualify the array declaration with volatile so that the compiler won't optimize away the loads at -O3?

    – Hadi Brais
    Mar 7 at 18:20











  • @HadiBrais Yes I have volatile array so reading in temp won't be optimized. I will check without flush. now I am sure I will get the same result but I will try

    – Ana Khorguani
    Mar 7 at 18:30












  • @HadiBrais yes I have the same behavior without clflush. Just to make sure, this first loop, when I initialize array, it writes first time in the element and then evicts this cache line right? I did not suspect this before but I tested it today and surprisingly this is the observation I got. I read about on demand zeroing in another post, which as I understood was the reason of RFO case right? So is it somehow related to cache line eviction too?

    – Ana Khorguani
    Mar 7 at 18:37











  • for 500, initialization of PAPI after, gives result: L1_HIT: 62, L1_MISS: 513, L2_HIT: 16, L2_MISS: 497, and initializing before: L1_HIT: 67, L1_MISS: 510, L2_HIT: 377, L2_MISS: 133. seems to be same behavior. It's same for 300. After initialization: L1_HIT: 83, L1_MISS: 304, L2_HIT: 6, L2_MISS: 298. initializing before array: L1_HIT: 82, L1_MISS: 302, L2_HIT: 117, L2_MISS: 185,

    – Ana Khorguani
    Mar 7 at 18:48











  • It is as if PAPI_library_init is causing all the L2 lines to be evicted. Looking at the source code, I don't see why would this happen. What about MEM_LOAD_RETIRED.L3_MISS and MEM_LOAD_RETIRED.L3_HIT?

    – Hadi Brais
    Mar 7 at 18:58
















Can you check without _mm_clflush(&array[i]);? Can you check for smaller array sizes such as 500 and 300 elements instead of 1000? Did you have qualify the array declaration with volatile so that the compiler won't optimize away the loads at -O3?

– Hadi Brais
Mar 7 at 18:20





Can you check without _mm_clflush(&array[i]);? Can you check for smaller array sizes such as 500 and 300 elements instead of 1000? Did you have qualify the array declaration with volatile so that the compiler won't optimize away the loads at -O3?

– Hadi Brais
Mar 7 at 18:20













@HadiBrais Yes I have volatile array so reading in temp won't be optimized. I will check without flush. now I am sure I will get the same result but I will try

– Ana Khorguani
Mar 7 at 18:30






@HadiBrais Yes I have volatile array so reading in temp won't be optimized. I will check without flush. now I am sure I will get the same result but I will try

– Ana Khorguani
Mar 7 at 18:30














@HadiBrais yes I have the same behavior without clflush. Just to make sure, this first loop, when I initialize array, it writes first time in the element and then evicts this cache line right? I did not suspect this before but I tested it today and surprisingly this is the observation I got. I read about on demand zeroing in another post, which as I understood was the reason of RFO case right? So is it somehow related to cache line eviction too?

– Ana Khorguani
Mar 7 at 18:37





@HadiBrais yes I have the same behavior without clflush. Just to make sure, this first loop, when I initialize array, it writes first time in the element and then evicts this cache line right? I did not suspect this before but I tested it today and surprisingly this is the observation I got. I read about on demand zeroing in another post, which as I understood was the reason of RFO case right? So is it somehow related to cache line eviction too?

– Ana Khorguani
Mar 7 at 18:37













for 500, initialization of PAPI after, gives result: L1_HIT: 62, L1_MISS: 513, L2_HIT: 16, L2_MISS: 497, and initializing before: L1_HIT: 67, L1_MISS: 510, L2_HIT: 377, L2_MISS: 133. seems to be same behavior. It's same for 300. After initialization: L1_HIT: 83, L1_MISS: 304, L2_HIT: 6, L2_MISS: 298. initializing before array: L1_HIT: 82, L1_MISS: 302, L2_HIT: 117, L2_MISS: 185,

– Ana Khorguani
Mar 7 at 18:48





for 500, initialization of PAPI after, gives result: L1_HIT: 62, L1_MISS: 513, L2_HIT: 16, L2_MISS: 497, and initializing before: L1_HIT: 67, L1_MISS: 510, L2_HIT: 377, L2_MISS: 133. seems to be same behavior. It's same for 300. After initialization: L1_HIT: 83, L1_MISS: 304, L2_HIT: 6, L2_MISS: 298. initializing before array: L1_HIT: 82, L1_MISS: 302, L2_HIT: 117, L2_MISS: 185,

– Ana Khorguani
Mar 7 at 18:48













It is as if PAPI_library_init is causing all the L2 lines to be evicted. Looking at the source code, I don't see why would this happen. What about MEM_LOAD_RETIRED.L3_MISS and MEM_LOAD_RETIRED.L3_HIT?

– Hadi Brais
Mar 7 at 18:58





It is as if PAPI_library_init is causing all the L2 lines to be evicted. Looking at the source code, I don't see why would this happen. What about MEM_LOAD_RETIRED.L3_MISS and MEM_LOAD_RETIRED.L3_HIT?

– Hadi Brais
Mar 7 at 18:58












0






active

oldest

votes











Your Answer






StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function ()
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function ()
StackExchange.using("snippets", function ()
StackExchange.snippets.init();
);
);
, "code-snippets");

StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "1"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);

else
createEditor();

);

function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);



);













draft saved

draft discarded


















StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fstackoverflow.com%2fquestions%2f55041684%2fwhy-does-the-results-of-reading-hardware-counters-with-papi-depend-on-papi-libra%23new-answer', 'question_page');

);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown

























0






active

oldest

votes








0






active

oldest

votes









active

oldest

votes






active

oldest

votes















draft saved

draft discarded
















































Thanks for contributing an answer to Stack Overflow!


  • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

But avoid


  • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

  • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.

To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




draft saved


draft discarded














StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fstackoverflow.com%2fquestions%2f55041684%2fwhy-does-the-results-of-reading-hardware-counters-with-papi-depend-on-papi-libra%23new-answer', 'question_page');

);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown





















































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown

































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown







Popular posts from this blog

Can't initialize raids on a new ASUS Prime B360M-A motherboard2019 Community Moderator ElectionSimilar to RAID config yet more like mirroring solution?Can't get motherboard serial numberWhy does the BIOS entry point start with a WBINVD instruction?UEFI performance Asus Maximus V Extreme

Identity Server 4 is not redirecting to Angular app after login2019 Community Moderator ElectionIdentity Server 4 and dockerIdentityserver implicit flow unauthorized_clientIdentityServer Hybrid Flow - Access Token is null after user successful loginIdentity Server to MVC client : Page Redirect After loginLogin with Steam OpenId(oidc-client-js)Identity Server 4+.NET Core 2.0 + IdentityIdentityServer4 post-login redirect not working in Edge browserCall to IdentityServer4 generates System.NullReferenceException: Object reference not set to an instance of an objectIdentityServer4 without HTTPS not workingHow to get Authorization code from identity server without login form

2005 Ahvaz unrest Contents Background Causes Casualties Aftermath See also References Navigation menue"At Least 10 Are Killed by Bombs in Iran""Iran"Archived"Arab-Iranians in Iran to make April 15 'Day of Fury'"State of Mind, State of Order: Reactions to Ethnic Unrest in the Islamic Republic of Iran.10.1111/j.1754-9469.2008.00028.x"Iran hangs Arab separatists"Iran Overview from ArchivedConstitution of the Islamic Republic of Iran"Tehran puzzled by forged 'riots' letter""Iran and its minorities: Down in the second class""Iran: Handling Of Ahvaz Unrest Could End With Televised Confessions""Bombings Rock Iran Ahead of Election""Five die in Iran ethnic clashes""Iran: Need for restraint as anniversary of unrest in Khuzestan approaches"Archived"Iranian Sunni protesters killed in clashes with security forces"Archived