[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <51C34F8D.2000806@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 20 Jun 2013 12:53:01 -0600
From: David Ahern <dsahern@...il.com>
To: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
CC: Oleg Nesterov <oleg@...hat.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>,
Masami Hiramatsu <masami.hiramatsu.pt@...achi.com>,
Srikar Dronamraju <srikar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
"zhangwei(Jovi)" <jovi.zhangwei@...wei.com>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/3] tracing/perf: perf_trace_buf/perf_xxx hacks.
On 6/20/13 12:47 PM, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Thu, 2013-06-20 at 12:35 -0600, David Ahern wrote:
>> On 6/20/13 12:23 PM, Steven Rostedt wrote:
>>>
>>> I ran this:
>>>
>>> perf stat --repeat 100 -- perf bench sched pipe > /tmp/perf-bench-sched.{before, after}
>>
>> You want to compare:
>> perf stat --repeat 100 -p 1 -- perf bench sched pipe
>>
>> so that event is tagged to pid 1 and not the perf-bench workload.
>
> I guess I'm a bit confused. What's the significance of measuring pid 1
> (init)?
I believe Oleg's point is the overhead for tasks without events
associated with them. To show that create an event tagged to the init
task and then run some workload -- like perf bench shed pipe. It shows
that all tasks take a hit, not just the one getting profiled.
David
--
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