[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CABPqkBT48Nx0qkPgnS=JsX0Etb7Xr1rLgoOAk1bt7L+DHvugGA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 25 Mar 2014 23:15:05 +0100
From: Stephane Eranian <eranian@...gle.com>
To: Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>
Cc: Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...radead.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>,
Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] tools, perf: Allow the user to disable time stamps
On Tue, Mar 25, 2014 at 10:01 PM, Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com> wrote:
>>
>> Timestamp are useful to order samples during reporting.
>> How do you do with it if you monitor multi-threaded (multi-cpu)
>> workloads. This is only good for single thread or single CPU
>> measurements. Or am I missing something?
>
> For a perf report order doesn't matter (except against mmaps)
> The CPUs are still separated of course
>
But getting the mmaps at the right moment is crucial for some apps
especially if address space is recycled otherwise symbolization
may be incorrect.
> You're right for some special analysis it matters, that is why
> it is only an option.
>
> But for the standard "only care about perf report and
> don't care about about program startup" case it's a nice saving.
>
How do you know in advance you won't need mmap ordering?
--
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