[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20151214164130.GS6357@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 2015 17:41:30 +0100
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
To: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>
Cc: David Ahern <dsahern@...il.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...il.com>,
Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>,
Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org>,
Stephane Eranian <eranian@...gle.com>,
Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@...el.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCHSET 00/16] perf top: Add multi-thread support (v1)
On Mon, Dec 14, 2015 at 01:26:55PM -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
> Em Mon, Dec 14, 2015 at 07:55:32AM -0700, David Ahern escreveu:
> > On 12/14/15 2:38 AM, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > >
> > >>And in an unrelated note, I absolutely detest --buildid being the
> > >>default, it makes perf-record blow chunks.
> Multiple things here, .debug/ should be size limited, and buildid
> processing doesn't need necessarily to store things in that cache, I bet
> what PeterZ is complaining about is the reprocessing of events at the
> end of the session, to find out about the PERF_RECORD_MMAP* events to
> then read the build-ids and insert then into the perf.data file header.
>
Yeah, its the reprocessing that is taking forever.. On my moderately
sized system with 40 CPUs, the reprocessing is taking about as long as
the actual workload, which is tedious.
Once I figured out what was happening Jiri was quick to point out I
should be using -B.
--
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