| lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2017 13:17:21 -0300
From: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>
To: Taeung Song <treeze.taeung@...il.com>
Cc: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <arnaldo.melo@...il.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>,
Milian Wolff <milian.wolff@...b.com>,
Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 3/9] perf annotate: Fix wrong --show-total-period
option showing number of samples
Em Wed, Jul 26, 2017 at 12:53:28AM +0900, Taeung Song escreveu:
> On 07/25/2017 11:42 PM, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
> > > Moreover there is the below case that is not aligned due to big period
> > > values.
> > So, that "moreover" means its not just one patch, but at least two, i.e.
> > when one selects show-total-period we better have more space for that
> > column, right?
> I got it. will separate this patch.
Ok, please continue your work from my perf/core branch that I just
pushed, in it the latest patch is this one:
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/acme/linux.git/commit/?h=perf/core&id=143e9656aec7c61b9b8e134da5abc5dfb6133cbf
Which is a chunk of what you done below. More comments below.
> > I'll break the patch below accordingly.
> >
> > And even then, there is one question left, see below
> >
> > > perf annotate --stdio -i milian.data --show-total-period
> > > Percent | Source code & Disassembly of test for cycles:ppp (1442
> > > samples)
> > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > :
> > > :
> > > :
> > > : Disassembly of section .text:
> > > ...
> > > 0 : 40089d: pxor %xmm1,%xmm1
> > > 27288350 : 4008a1: cvtsi2sd %rsi,%xmm1
> > > 0 : 4008a6: pxor %xmm5,%xmm5
> > >
> > >
> > > So, I made a patch like below:
<SNIP>
> > > +++ b/tools/perf/util/annotate.c
> > > @@ -1142,7 +1142,7 @@ static int disasm_line__print(struct disasm_line *dl,
> > > struct symbol *sym, u64 st
> > > color = get_percent_color(percent);
> > >
> > > if (symbol_conf.show_total_period)
> > > - color_fprintf(stdout, color, " %7" PRIu64,
> > > + color_fprintf(stdout, color, " %11" PRIu64,
> > > sample.period);
> >
> > this part will be in a separate patch, i.e. something like:
> >
> > [PATCH] Widen "Period" column when using --show-total-period
> >
>
> ok.
>
> > > else
> > > color_fprintf(stdout, color, " %7.2f",
> > > percent);
> > > @@ -1173,6 +1173,10 @@ static int disasm_line__print(struct disasm_line *dl,
> > > struct symbol *sym, u64 st
> > > if (perf_evsel__is_group_event(evsel))
> > > width *= evsel->nr_members;
> > >
> > > + if (symbol_conf.show_total_period)
> > > + width += perf_evsel__is_group_event(evsel) ?
> > > + 4 * evsel->nr_members : 4;
> > > +
> >
> > But what about this one? What is that '4' for? Not obvious at first
> > sight, can you elaborate on the need for this specific one?
> >
>
> Yep, if you check the above code lines, like below:
>
> color_fprintf(stdout, color, " %11" PRIu64,
> sample.period);
>
> The above number of letters is 12
> i.e. 12 = 1 (" ": white space) + 11 (digits of sample.period)
>
> So, I used '4', because the 'width' variable is initialized as '8'.
Think that I am 7 years old :o) I'm still not understanding this
logic...
> Additionally this patch handle the width for group event like below:
>
> $ perf annotate --show-total-period -i group_events.data --stdio
> Event count | Source code & Disassembly of old for
> cycles (529 samples)
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> :
> :
> :
> : Disassembly of section .text:
> :
> : 0000000000400816
> <get_cond_maxprice>:
> : get_cond_maxprice():
> 0 0 7144 : 400816: push %rbp
> 3480988 0 5709 : 400817: mov %rsp,%rbp
> 0 0 7522 : 40081a: mov %edi,-0x24(%rbp)
>
>
> Sorry, I repeatedly failed to adjust a proper patch unit..
> I'll remake this patches based on your comment,
> and resend next patchset !
It is not a problem, you're making progress, thanks for taking into
accoutn my comments.
The end result may be the same, but having a good patch granularity is
fundamental for bisecting, also for maintainers to cherry-pick parts of
your work that they agree on while making comments about parts that
looks wrong or needing some more work.
> > > if (!*dl->line)
> > > printf(" %*s:\n", width, " ");
> > > else
> > > @@ -1823,8 +1827,14 @@ int symbol__annotate_printf(struct symbol *sym,
> > > struct map *map,
> > > if (perf_evsel__is_group_event(evsel))
> > > width *= evsel->nr_members;
> > >
> > > + if (symbol_conf.show_total_period)
> > > + width += perf_evsel__is_group_event(evsel) ?
> > > + 4 * evsel->nr_members : 4;
> >
> > What about this one?
> >
>
> ditto.
>
> > > +
> > > graph_dotted_len = printf(" %-*.*s| Source code & Disassembly
> > > of %s for %s (%" PRIu64 " samples)\n",
> > > - width, width, "Percent", d_filename, evsel_name,
> > > h->nr_samples);
> > > + width, width,
> > > + symbol_conf.show_total_period ? "Event
> > > count" : "Percent",
> > > + d_filename, evsel_name, h->nr_samples);
> > >
> >
> > this one will be in a separate patch, with the title you chose:
> >
> > [PATCH] perf annotate: Show the proper header when using --show-total-period
> >
>
> ok.
>
>
> Thanks,
> Taeung
>
> > > printf("%-*.*s----\n",
> > > graph_dotted_len, graph_dotted_len, graph_dotted_line);
> > >
> >
> > - Arnaldo
> >
Powered by blists - more mailing lists