linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 10/10] perf record: Add an option to force per-cpu mmaps

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <5286149E.9040800@intel.com>
Date:	Fri, 15 Nov 2013 14:33:34 +0200
From:	Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@...el.com>
To:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
CC:	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...radead.org>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, David Ahern <dsahern@...il.com>,
	Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...hat.com>, Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>,
	Mike Galbraith <efault@....de>,
	Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...il.com>,
	Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>,
	Stephane Eranian <eranian@...gle.com>,
	Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...hat.com>,
	Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 10/10] perf record: Add an option to force per-cpu mmaps

On 15/11/13 14:05, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> 
> * Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org> wrote:
> 
>> On Fri, Nov 15, 2013 at 12:56:29PM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>>> So, here's the current status quo, there's 4 basic types of profiling 
>>> that 99% of the people are using, in order of popularity:
>>>
>>> 	perf record <cmd>
>>> 	perf record -a sleep N
>>> 	perf record -p <PID>
>>> 	perf record -t <TID>
>>>
>>> The first two (which I'd guess comprise about 95% of real-world usage) 
>>> have inheritance enabled.
>>>
>>> The last two (-p/-t) have inheritance disabled by default.
>>
>> Yes, and I would expect it to be disabled for the TID option as you 
>> explicitly select a single threads.
> 
> Correct.
> 
>> For the process wide thing it would make sense to enable inheritance 
>> by default though.
>>
>> So the big trade-off is that for single threaded processes which do 
>> not fork you now have a single buffer, whereas with the inheritance 
>> option you'll end up with nr_cpus buffers by default.
>>
>> I suppose for most normal people that's not really an issue; and I 
>> suppose all people with silly large machines already pay extra 
>> attention -- but at least make it explicit and very clear that this 
>> is so.
> 
> Do the first variant, 'perf record <cmd>', already use per CPU 
> buffers?

Yes.

Another difference (and I need to fix the patch) is that per-cpu mmaps
require PERF_SAMPLE_TIME so that the events do not appear out of order.

--
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/