[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20110307180619.GG1873@nowhere>
Date: Mon, 7 Mar 2011 19:06:21 +0100
From: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>
To: Sam Liao <phyomh@...il.com>
Cc: linux-perf-users@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
acme@...hat.com, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Add inverted call graph report support to perf tool
On Mon, Mar 07, 2011 at 09:43:27PM +0800, Sam Liao wrote:
> Add "-r" option to support inverted butterfly report, in the
> inverted report, the call graph start from the callee's ancestor,
> like main->func1->func2 style. users can use such view to catch
> system's performance bottleneck, find the software's design
> problem not just some function's poor performance.
Yeah, that can be interesting.
>
> Current pref implementation is not easy to add such inversion, so this
> fix just invert the ip and callchain in an ugly style. But I do think
> this invert
> view help developer to find performance root cause for complex
> software.
> ---
> tools/perf/builtin-report.c | 43 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> 1 files changed, 43 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/tools/perf/builtin-report.c b/tools/perf/builtin-report.c
> index c27e31f..ac2ec0e 100644
> --- a/tools/perf/builtin-report.c
> +++ b/tools/perf/builtin-report.c
> @@ -33,6 +33,7 @@
> static char const *input_name = "perf.data";
>
> static bool force, use_tui, use_stdio;
> +static bool reverse_call;
> static bool hide_unresolved;
> static bool dont_use_callchains;
>
> @@ -155,6 +156,41 @@ static int process_sample_event(event_t *event,
> struct sample_data *sample,
> {
> struct addr_location al;
> struct perf_event_attr *attr;
> +
> + /* reverse call chain data */
> + if (reverse_call && symbol_conf.use_callchain && sample->callchain) {
> + struct ip_callchain *chain;
> + int i, j;
> + u64 tmp_ip;
> + event_t *reverse_event;
> +
> + chain = malloc(sizeof(u64) * (sample->callchain->nr + 1));
> + if (!chain) {
> + pr_debug("malloc failed\n");
> + return -1;
> + }
> + reverse_event = malloc(sizeof(event_t));
> + if (!reverse_event) {
> + pr_debug("malloc failed\n");
> + return -1;
> + }
> + memcpy(reverse_event, event, sizeof(event_t));
> +
> + chain->nr = sample->callchain->nr;
> + j = sample->callchain->nr;
> + tmp_ip = event->ip.ip;
> + reverse_event->ip.ip = sample->callchain->ips[j-1];
> + chain->ips[j-1] = tmp_ip;
> + for (i = 0, j = sample->callchain->nr - 2; i < j; i++, j--) {
> + chain->ips[i] = sample->callchain->ips[j];
> + chain->ips[j] = sample->callchain->ips[i];
> + }
> +
> + sample->callchain = chain;
> + call_chain_reversed = true;
> + event = reverse_event;
> + }
So, instead of having such temporary copy, could you rather feed the callchain
into the cursor in reverse from perf_session__resolve_callchain() ?
You can keep the common part inside the loop into a seperate helper
but have two different kinds of loops.
>
> if (event__preprocess_sample(event, session, &al, sample, NULL) < 0) {
> fprintf(stderr, "problem processing %d event, skipping it.\n",
> @@ -177,6 +213,11 @@ static int process_sample_event(event_t *event,
> struct sample_data *sample,
> return -1;
> }
>
> + if (reverse_call && call_chain_reversed) {
> + free(sample->callchain);
> + free(event);
> + }
> +
> return 0;
> }
>
> @@ -469,6 +510,8 @@ static const struct option options[] = {
> OPT_CALLBACK_DEFAULT('g', "call-graph", NULL, "output_type,min_percent",
> "Display callchains using output_type (graph, flat, fractal,
> or none) and min percent threshold. "
> "Default: fractal,0.5", &parse_callchain_opt, callchain_default_opt),
> + OPT_BOOLEAN('r', "reverse-call", &reverse_call,
> + "reverse call chain report (butterfly view)"),
What about making it an argument to the exisiting -g option, something
that defines the base of the callchain like "caller" and "callee"
Like "-g graph,0.5,caller".
caller would be what we call here reverse and callee the current and future default.
Does that look sensible?
--
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