linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v3] perf tools: Document --children option in more detail

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: <20150422060906.GA21451@danjae.kornet>
Date:	Wed, 22 Apr 2015 15:09:06 +0900
From:	Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>
To:	Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>
Cc:	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
	Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
	David Ahern <dsahern@...il.com>,
	Taeung Song <treeze.taeung@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3] perf tools: Document --children option in more detail

Hi Arnaldo,

On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 01:46:40PM -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
> Em Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at 01:16:29AM +0900, Namhyung Kim escreveu:
> > On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 12:41:33PM -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
> > > > +++ b/tools/perf/Documentation/overhead-calculation.txt
> > > I think Ingo suggested that you renamed this file to include the word
> > > "callchain" in it, no? looking at "overhead-calculation" I feel like I
> > > first have to open it to figure out what kind of overhead is this,
> > > perhaps it would be better named:
> 
> > > 	tools/perf/Documentation/callchain-overhead.txt
> > > ?
>  
> > Please see my reply to the Ingo's post.  I think he agreed on this name.
> 
> I still find it confusing for the file name, where there is no context,
> from just the file name when one does a 'ls tools/perf/Documentatoin' to
> figure out about what overhead that is referring to.
> 
> So, perhaps a longer name:
> 
> tools/perf/Documentation/callchain-overhead-calculation.txt
> 
> ?

OK, will change.

> 
> Inside perf-{record,top}.txt, yeah, we have context, we know that this
> is about post processing, formatting, etc.

Right.

> 
> <SNIP>
>  
> > > > +--no-children option on the command line or by adding 'report.children
> > > > += false' or 'top.children = false' in the perf config file.
> > > 
> > > One can as well use the OPTION_FOO shortening mechanism and instead use:
> > > 
> > >      perf report --no-ch
> > > 
> > > Which is enough to disambiguate it from "--no-column-widths" and "--no-cpu".
> > 
> > Are you saying that you want to add the short form instead of the full
> > --no-chlidren name?  I think we need to verbose in the manpage at
> > least and it might not work in the future if some --chxxx option is
> > added.
> 
> Perhaps:
> 
> "--no-children option on the command line or by adding 'report.children = false'
> or 'top.children = false' in the perf config file.
> 
> A shorter form on the command line can be used, for instance '--no-ch'
> is unambiguous at the time of this writing."

I don't think it belongs here.  The shorter form is not only for the
--children, so it should be described in different place.


>  
> > > > diff --git a/tools/perf/Documentation/perf-report.txt b/tools/perf/Documentation/perf-report.txt
> > > > index 4879cf638824..b7bb298deee3 100644
> > > > --- a/tools/perf/Documentation/perf-report.txt
> > > > +++ b/tools/perf/Documentation/perf-report.txt
> > > > @@ -193,6 +193,7 @@ OPTIONS
> > > >  	Accumulate callchain of children to parent entry so that then can
> > > >  	show up in the output.  The output will have a new "Children" column
> > > >  	and will be sorted on the data.  It requires callchains are recorded.
> > > > +	See the `overhead calculation' section for more details.
> > > 
> > >                 `callchain overhead'
> > 
> > Do you prefer this name to 'overhead calculation'?  For me, it looks
> 
> It is ok with me "overhead calculation", as mentioned previously in this
> message, the context in this perf-report.txt file should make it clear
> that the overhead is about callchains.

OK, I'll leave it as is.

Thanks,
Namhyung


> 
> > like saying about how much overhead will be added if we enabled
> > callchains at perf record time or processing them at perf report time.
> 
> Ok.
> 
> - Arnaldo
--
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/