[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20151124052708.GB2636@sejong>
Date: Tue, 24 Nov 2015 14:27:08 +0900
From: Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>
To: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>
CC: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <arnaldo.melo@...il.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
David Ahern <dsahern@...il.com>, Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>,
Kan Liang <kan.liang@...el.com>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 34/37] perf hists browser: Support flat callchains
On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 04:16:48PM +0100, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 19, 2015 at 02:53:20PM -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
> > From: Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>
> >
> > The flat callchain mode is to print all chains in a single, simple
> > hierarchy so make it easy to see.
> >
> > Currently perf report --tui doesn't show flat callchains properly. With
> > flat callchains, only leaf nodes are added to the final rbtree so it
> > should show entries in parent nodes. To do that, add parent_val list to
> > struct callchain_node and show them along with the (normal) val list.
> >
> > For example, consider following callchains with '-g graph'.
> >
> > $ perf report -g graph
> > - 39.93% swapper [kernel.vmlinux] [k] intel_idle
> > intel_idle
> > cpuidle_enter_state
> > cpuidle_enter
> > call_cpuidle
> > - cpu_startup_entry
> > 28.63% start_secondary
> > - 11.30% rest_init
> > start_kernel
> > x86_64_start_reservations
> > x86_64_start_kernel
> >
> > Before:
> > $ perf report -g flat
> > - 39.93% swapper [kernel.vmlinux] [k] intel_idle
> > 28.63% start_secondary
> > - 11.30% rest_init
> > start_kernel
> > x86_64_start_reservations
> > x86_64_start_kernel
> >
> > After:
> > $ perf report -g flat
> > - 39.93% swapper [kernel.vmlinux] [k] intel_idle
> > - 28.63% intel_idle
> > cpuidle_enter_state
> > cpuidle_enter
> > call_cpuidle
> > cpu_startup_entry
> > start_secondary
> > - 11.30% intel_idle
> > cpuidle_enter_state
> > cpuidle_enter
> > call_cpuidle
> > cpu_startup_entry
> > start_kernel
> > x86_64_start_reservations
> > x86_64_start_kernel
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>
> > Tested-by: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...hat.com>
> > Tested-by: Brendan Gregg <brendan.d.gregg@...il.com>
> > Cc: Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>
> > Cc: David Ahern <dsahern@...il.com>
> > Cc: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>
> > Cc: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>
> > Cc: Kan Liang <kan.liang@...el.com>
> > Cc: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
> > Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/1447047946-1691-8-git-send-email-namhyung@kernel.org
> > Signed-off-by: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...hat.com>
> > ---
>
> [...]
>
> > +int callchain_node__make_parent_list(struct callchain_node *node)
> > +{
> > + struct callchain_node *parent = node->parent;
> > + struct callchain_list *chain, *new;
> > + LIST_HEAD(head);
> > +
> > + while (parent) {
> > + list_for_each_entry_reverse(chain, &parent->val, list) {
> > + new = malloc(sizeof(*new));
> > + if (new == NULL)
> > + goto out;
> > + *new = *chain;
> > + new->has_children = false;
> > + list_add_tail(&new->list, &head);
> > + }
> > + parent = parent->parent;
> > + }
> > +
> > + list_for_each_entry_safe_reverse(chain, new, &head, list)
> > + list_move_tail(&chain->list, &node->parent_val);
> > +
> > + if (!list_empty(&node->parent_val)) {
> > + chain = list_first_entry(&node->parent_val, struct callchain_list, list);
> > + chain->has_children = rb_prev(&node->rb_node) || rb_next(&node->rb_node);
> > +
> > + chain = list_first_entry(&node->val, struct callchain_list, list);
> > + chain->has_children = false;
>
> I'm a bit puzzled with this, can't we rewind through the parents on printing or adding
> to the flat rbtree instead of having this parent_val field?
Yes, this code is to simplify things on parent nodes. Maybe we could
go up to parents and print the callchain list there as you said.
However, problem I think is how to handle 'has_children' information
on parents. That info controls folding status of each callchain. As
the info is in the struct callchain_list and flat or folded callchain
mode require the info should be in the top-most entry, I cannot share
entries in parent nodes.
Thus I simply copied callchain lists in parents to leaf nodes. Yes,
it will consume some memory but can simplify the code.
Thank you for your review anyway!
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/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists