[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4B0657A4.2040606@cs.helsinki.fi>
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 2009 10:47:32 +0200
From: Pekka Enberg <penberg@...helsinki.fi>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
CC: Li Zefan <lizf@...fujitsu.com>,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...hat.com>,
Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Eduard - Gabriel Munteanu <eduard.munteanu@...ux360.ro>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-mm@...ck.org" <linux-mm@...ck.org>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 1/2] perf: Add 'perf kmem' tool
Ingo Molnar kirjoitti:
> Regarding patch 2 - can we set some definitive benchmark threshold for
> that? I.e. a list of must-have features in 'perf kmem' before we can do
> it? 100% information and analysis equivalency with kmemtrace-user tool?
I'd be interested to hear Eduard's comment on that.
That said, I'll try to find some time to test "perf kmem" and provide
feedback on that. I can ACK the patch when I'm happy with the output. :-)
I'm mostly interested in two scenarios: (1) getting a nice report on
worst fragmented call-sites (perf kmem needs symbol lookup) and (2)
doing "perf kmem record" on machine A (think embedded here) and then
"perf kmem report" on machine B. I haven't tried kmemtrace-user for a
while but it did support both of them quite nicely at some point.
Pekka
--
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