[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20131112150751.GA19321@ghostprotocols.net>
Date: Tue, 12 Nov 2013 12:07:51 -0300
From: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...stprotocols.net>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc: David Ahern <dsahern@...il.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
mingo@...nel.org, jolsa@...hat.com,
Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>,
Mike Galbraith <efault@....de>,
Stephane Eranian <eranian@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/5] perf record: mmap output file - v5
Em Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 03:57:07PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra escreveu:
> On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 07:46:56AM -0700, David Ahern wrote:
> > When recording raw_syscalls for the entire system, e.g.,
> > perf record -e raw_syscalls:*,sched:sched_switch -a -- sleep 1
> >
> > you end up with a negative feedback loop as perf itself calls write() fairly
> > often. This patch handles the problem by mmap'ing the file in chunks of 64M at
> > a time and copies events from the event buffers to the file avoiding write
> > system calls.
>
> You know this completely fails the moment you trace faults, because
> every new access to one of those pages (to mark it dirty) will trigger a
> fault. And we'll take a bunch more faults -- one for each page -- than
> we ever did write() syscalls.
So we should provide a neon lettered warning when doing that, no? :-)
> Anyway the over all performance improvements still make it worth it. But
> the above seems like a false argument in favour of this.
--
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