[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20121026170034.GB20695@ghostprotocols.net>
Date: Fri, 26 Oct 2012 10:00:34 -0700
From: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...stprotocols.net>
To: Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>
Cc: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>,
Corey Ashford <cjashfor@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/11] perf tool: Add PERF_SAMPLE_READ sample read support
Em Sat, Oct 27, 2012 at 12:39:06AM +0900, Namhyung Kim escreveu:
> 2012-10-26 (금), 12:23 +0200, Jiri Olsa:
> > $ ./perf record -e '{cycles,cache-misses}:S,instructions' ls
> > $ ./perf record -e '{cycles:S,cache-misses},instructions' ls
> > $ ./perf record -e 'cycles:S,instructions' ls
> > - non matching sample_type
> >
> > hm, thats the unique sample_type issue again ;) Once we set
> > PERF_SAMPLE_READ for event or group, we need to set it for
> > all other events in session, otherwise the report fails
>
> Sorry, I don't understand why we need to set it for all events. Just
> setting it for a group is not sufficient? Please shed some light on
> this.
Artificial limitation on having multiple sample_type's on a single
perf.data?
My plan is to experiment with multiple evlists in 'trace' to get, say,
callchains on some events but not in the others.
- Arnaldo
--
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