[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <528AB229.6030603@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 18 Nov 2013 17:34:49 -0700
From: David Ahern <dsahern@...il.com>
To: Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
CC: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...stprotocols.net>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, jolsa@...hat.com,
Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
Mike Galbraith <efault@....de>,
Stephane Eranian <eranian@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 4/5] perf record: mmap output file - v5
On 11/18/13, 5:24 PM, Namhyung Kim wrote:
>>>> What now? Can we add the mmap path as an option?
>>>
>>> I'd say an option is always a possibility, but someone please try
>>> what happens if you use stupid large events (dwarf stack copies) on
>>> PERF_COUNT_SW_PAGE_FAULTS (.period=1) while recording with mmap().
>>>
>>> The other option is to simply disallow PERF_SAMPLE_STACK_USER for
>>> that event.
>>>
>>> Personally I think 8k copies for every event are way stupid anyway,
>>> that's a metric ton of data at a huge cost.
>>
>> Well, with 1 khz sampling of a single threaded workload it's 8MB per
>> second - that's 80 MB for 10 seconds profiling - not the end of the
>> world.
>
> We now use 4 khz sampling frequency by default, just FYI. :)
I think Peter is asking about:
perf record -e faults -c 1 --call-graph dwarf,8192 -a -- sleep 1
And as expected it is a massive feedback spiraling out of control.
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