[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <1294844021.19601.51.camel@laptop>
Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2011 15:53:41 +0100
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>
Cc: Kirill Smelkov <kirr@....spb.ru>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...hat.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>, Mike Galbraith <efault@....de>,
Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>,
Stephane Eranian <eranian@...gle.com>,
Tom Zanussi <tzanussi@...il.com>
Subject: Re: Q: perf log mode?
On Wed, 2011-01-12 at 15:42 +0100, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 12, 2011 at 03:08:08PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Wed, 2011-01-12 at 17:06 +0300, Kirill Smelkov wrote:
> > > I'm trying to use perf together with e.g. kprobes as a tool to show what
> > > is happening with my system in "live-log" mode. The problem is, for
> > > seldom events, actual info output is largely delayed because perf reads
> > > sample data in whole pages. Could something be done with it or am I'm
> > > missing something? Here is detailed description:
> >
> > perf_event_attr = {
> > .watermark = 0,
> > .wakeup_events = 1,
> > };
>
>
> Which is perhaps something we want as a default when perf record -c 1
> and the output is the pipe mode.
No, definitely not, esp for -c1 you want large buffers because the event
can come at very high freq.
Nor does pipe mode have anything to do with it, the whole script set-up
plain stinks and should not be using pipe mode, pipe mode should only be
used to pipe data over the network and other remote profiling like
things.
--
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