linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 2/2] perf report: Display average IPC and IPC coverage per symbol

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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:   Tue, 27 Nov 2018 10:34:54 +0100
From:   Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>
To:     "Jin, Yao" <yao.jin@...ux.intel.com>
Cc:     acme@...nel.org, jolsa@...nel.org, peterz@...radead.org,
        mingo@...hat.com, alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com,
        Linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, ak@...ux.intel.com,
        kan.liang@...el.com, yao.jin@...el.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] perf report: Display average IPC and IPC coverage
 per symbol

On Tue, Nov 27, 2018 at 11:42:12AM +0800, Jin, Yao wrote:
> 
> 
> On 11/26/2018 5:55 PM, Jiri Olsa wrote:
> > On Mon, Nov 26, 2018 at 05:40:54PM +0800, Jin Yao wrote:
> > 
> > SNIP
> > 
> > > diff --git a/tools/perf/util/sort.c b/tools/perf/util/sort.c
> > > index f96c005..94f62c8 100644
> > > --- a/tools/perf/util/sort.c
> > > +++ b/tools/perf/util/sort.c
> > > @@ -13,6 +13,7 @@
> > >   #include "strlist.h"
> > >   #include <traceevent/event-parse.h>
> > >   #include "mem-events.h"
> > > +#include "annotate.h"
> > >   #include <linux/kernel.h>
> > >   regex_t		parent_regex;
> > > @@ -422,6 +423,47 @@ struct sort_entry sort_srcline_to = {
> > >   	.se_width_idx	= HISTC_SRCLINE_TO,
> > >   };
> > > +static int hist_entry__sym_ipc_snprintf(struct hist_entry *he, char *bf,
> > > +					size_t size, unsigned int width)
> > > +{
> > > +
> > > +	struct symbol *sym = he->ms.sym;
> > > +	struct map *map = he->ms.map;
> > > +	struct perf_evsel *evsel = hists_to_evsel(he->hists);
> > > +	struct annotation *notes;
> > > +	double ipc = 0.0, coverage = 0.0;
> > > +	char tmp[64];
> > > +
> > > +	if (!sym)
> > > +		return repsep_snprintf(bf, size, "%-*s", width, "-");
> > > +
> > > +	if (!sym->annotated &&
> > > +	    symbol__annotate2(sym, map, evsel, &annotation__default_options,
> > > +			      NULL) < 0) {
> > > +		return 0;
> > > +	}
> > 
> > this seems to make the sorting extra long, would you
> > please consider progress bar update for this?
> > 
> > should be added somewhere around hists sorting code
> > 
> 
> Hi Jiri,
> 
> Sorting doesn't take long time in my test but the session event processing
> takes some time.
> 
> I just think maybe we need a new ops for stdio progress bar like what the
> tui_progress__ops does now. That should be benefit for all stdio usages.
> 
> That may be another separate patch-set.

sure, thanks

jirka