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
| ||
|
Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2016 08:14:24 -0700 From: David Ahern <dsahern@...il.com> To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>, Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org> Cc: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>, Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>, Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...nel.org>, LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, Stephane Eranian <eranian@...gle.com>, Andi Kleen <andi@...stfloor.org> Subject: Re: [PATCHSET 0/7] perf sched: Introduce timehist command, again (v1) On 11/15/16 12:34 AM, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > * Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org> wrote: > >>>> By default it shows the individual schedule events, including the time between >>>> sched-in events for the task, the task scheduling delay (time between wakeup >>>> and actually running) and run time for the task: >>>> >>>> time cpu task name[tid/pid] b/n time sch delay run time >>>> ------------- ---- -------------------- --------- --------- --------- >>>> 79371.874569 [11] gcc[31949] 0.014 0.000 1.148 >>>> 79371.874591 [10] gcc[31951] 0.000 0.000 0.024 >>>> 79371.874603 [10] migration/10[59] 3.350 0.004 0.011 >>>> 79371.874604 [11] <idle> 1.148 0.000 0.035 >>>> 79371.874723 [05] <idle> 0.016 0.000 1.383 >>>> 79371.874746 [05] gcc[31949] 0.153 0.078 0.022 >>>> ... >>> >>> What does the 'b/n' abbreviation stand for? 'Between'? Could we call the column >>> 'sch wait' instead, or so? >> >> Looks better, or what about 'wait time'? > > Works for me! That column generically is time not running -- time between the last sched out and the current sched in. It could be expected (sleep, select, read, ...), waiting for a resource (disk I/O, mutex) or preemption. > >> I'd go with the first option - simply adding arrows. It's good enough to >> identify each function IMHO. > > Ok! I'd prefer the arrows too for a default. Color can be an add-on option.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists