linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 1/3] perf tools: Record total sampling time

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: <87y542mqts.fsf@sejong.aot.lge.com>
Date:	Tue, 03 Dec 2013 14:44:15 +0900
From:	Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>
To:	Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...stprotocols.net>
Cc:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
	Stephane Eranian <eranian@...gle.com>,
	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
	Paul Mackerras <paulus@...ba.org>,
	Namhyung Kim <namhyung.kim@....com>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>, David Ahern <dsahern@...il.com>,
	Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
	Pekka Enberg <penberg@...nel.org>,
	Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
	Pekka Enberg <penberg@....fi>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] perf tools: Record total sampling time

On Mon, 2 Dec 2013 17:24:59 -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
> Em Mon, Dec 02, 2013 at 05:36:20PM +0100, Ingo Molnar escreveu:
>> * Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org> wrote:
>> > 2013-12-02 (월), 13:57 +0100, Ingo Molnar:
>> > > So basically, in the end I think it should be possible to have the 
>> > > following behavior:
>
>> > >    perf record -a -e cycles sleep 1
>
>> > >    perf report stat              # Reports as if we ran: 'perf stat -a -e cycles sleep 1'
>> > >    perf report                   # Reports the usual histogram
>
>> > >    perf report --stat            # Reports the perf stat output and the histogram
>
>> > > or so.
>
>> > I don't think we need both of 'perf report stat' and 'perf report
>> > --stat'.  At least it looks somewhat confusing to users IMHO.
>  
>> Okay. Maybe the --stat option would be the more logical choice, 
>> because '--' options can be added arbitrarily, while it would be weird 
>> to add multiple subcommand options.
>  
>> So basically there would be two options:
>  
>>    --show-stat         [--no-show-stat]
>>    --show-histogram    [--no-show-histogram]
>  
>> Today --show-histogram is the only one enabled by default.
>  
>> Running:
>  
>>    perf report --no-show-histogram --show-stat
>
> Why not:
>
> perf stat -i perf.data
>
> and make it be an optional argument, so plain:
>
> perf stat -i
>
> would process perf.data, i.e. would get the samples, accrue the periods,
> calculate the time, etc and then present it as 'perf stat <some
> target>'.

Yeah, actually this came into my head too.  But how about just making
"perf stat" read from perf.data and print output - I mean without the -i
option like other commands do.  Currently perf stat doesn't allow no
argument given it won't confuse existing users.

It should produce same output as Ingo suggested with "perf report
--show-stat --no-show-histogram".

>
> Right now 'perf stat -i' i used for '--no-inherit', perhaps we can just
> have --no-inherit have no short option and grab -i to have the same
> meaning as in 'report', 'script', etc.

Agreed.  Maybe we could change it to plain --inherit.

Thanks,
Namhyung
--
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/