[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20081126020459.GA16374@elte.hu>
Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2008 03:04:59 +0100
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>
Cc: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] tracing/function-return-tracer: set a more human
readable output
* Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu> wrote:
> Wow, very nice output! :-)
>
> I've applied them, will comment and test on them as well.
I kept playing with this for almost an hour and kept looking at pages
and pages of tracer output - it really shows the kernel's flow in a
completely different dimension!
Talked to Steve about it and we have a few minor suggestions regarding
the default output:
I think we should optimize the visual qualities of the output some
more.
Instead of:
pick_next_task() {
pick_next_task_fair() {
wakeup_preempt_entity() {
} 301
set_next_entity() {
update_stats_wait_end() {
} 281
__dequeue_entity() {
} 319
} 1990
hrtick_start_fair() {
} 276
} 4524
} 5341
We should print such traces [mockup]:
pick_next_task() { -
pick_next_task_fair() { -
wakeup_preempt_entity(); + 0.301 us
set_next_entity() { -
update_stats_wait_end(); + 0.281 us
__dequeue_entity(); + 0.319 us
} + 1.990 us
hrtick_start_fair(); + 0.276 us
+ } + 10.524 us
! } + 100.341 us
switch_mm(); + 0.494 us
The changes would be:
1) Compression of non-nested calls into a single line.
Implementing this probably necessiates some trickery with the
ring-buffer: we'd have to look at the next entry as well and see
whether it closes the function call.
2) Adding a closing ';' semicolon to single-line calls. It's the C
syntax and i'm missing it :-)
3) The first column: single-character visual shortcuts for "overhead".
This is a concept we used in the -rt tracer and it still lives in
the latency tracer bits of ftrace and is quite useful:
'+' means "overhead spike": overhead is above 10 usecs.
'!' means "large overhead": overhead is above 100 usecs.
These give at-a-glance hotspot analysis - hotspots are easier to
miss as pure numbers.
4) Printing out in units of microseconds, with a decimal point and by
explicitly mentioning the 'us' unit.
All of these are important properties: microseconds is still the
most common 'overhead' unit in kernel circles. It also gives rather
human single-digit or two-digit results. Nanoseconds is three or-
four-digit - which is too much. Repeating 'us' so many times is not
a problem - these lines will be grepped, quoted, etc - constant
reminder about the unit is just fine.
5) Nesting the overhead numbers aligned to the right end of the graph.
This cleans up the view of the source code printout, but not
cluttering it with numbers. It also structures the numbers some
more. Visual cues are given via '-' and '+' signs, to follow
nesting. This nesting aligns up with the function nesting levels on
the left side - so it's easy to pair up number and function name.
It also separates the numbers from the symbol length effects in the
single-line case. (which is the most common trace line)
What do you think? It's lots of work (sorry! :-), but it would produce
even more stunning graph-tracer output IMO.
Ingo
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists