[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <49DA70F0.3020108@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
Date: Mon, 06 Apr 2009 14:15:28 -0700
From: Corey Ashford <cjashfor@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
CC: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/6] perf_counter: add more context information
Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Mon, 2009-04-06 at 13:16 -0700, Corey Ashford wrote:
>
>>>> One downside of this approach is that you if you specify "no header"
>>>> (currently not possible, but maybe later?), you will not be able to get
>>>> the level bits.
>>> Would this be desirable?
>
>> I think it would. For one use case I'm working on right now, simple
>> profiling, all I need are ip's. If I could omit the header, that would
>> reduce the frequency of sigio's by a factor of three, and make it faster
>> to read up the ip's when the SIGIO's occur.
>
> Self-profiling?
>
> So you're interested in getting the smallest possible record size, that
> would still be 2 u64, right? Otherwise you don't get the IP context that
> started this.
>
>
Self-profiling mainly, yes. PAPI specs an ability for remote monitoring
of processes and threads, but I think it's only partially implemented.
So when you are talking about IP context, you mean pid/tid?
Regards,
- Corey
Corey Ashford
Software Engineer
IBM Linux Technology Center, Linux Toolchain
Beaverton, OR
503-578-3507
cjashfor@...ibm.com
--
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