[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAM9d7cixyyND8EOKRn8XdZj=Lf2S68bosMYMnAS4sGdc2x6zDg@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 17 Sep 2020 10:33:10 +0900
From: Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>
To: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>
Cc: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com>,
Stephane Eranian <eranian@...gle.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>,
Ian Rogers <irogers@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/4] perf stat: Add --for-each-cgroup option
On Wed, Sep 16, 2020 at 10:51 PM Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
<acme@...nel.org> wrote:
>
> Em Wed, Sep 16, 2020 at 03:31:27PM +0900, Namhyung Kim escreveu:
> > The --for-each-cgroup option is a syntax sugar to monitor large number
>
> You forgot to add the man page entry for this new option.
OK, will add.. any more comments?
Thanks
Namhyung
>
> > of cgroups easily. Current command line requires to list all the
> > events and cgroups even if users want to monitor same events for each
> > cgroup. This patch addresses that usage by copying given events for
> > each cgroup on user's behalf.
> >
> > For instance, if they want to monitor 6 events for 200 cgroups each
> > they should write 1200 event names (with -e) AND 1200 cgroup names
> > (with -G) on the command line. But with this change, they can just
> > specify 6 events and 200 cgroups with a new option.
> >
> > A simpler example below: It wants to measure 3 events for 2 cgroups
> > ('A' and 'B'). The result is that total 6 events are counted like
> > below.
> >
> > $ ./perf stat -a -e cpu-clock,cycles,instructions --for-each-cgroup A,B sleep 1
> >
> > Performance counter stats for 'system wide':
> >
> > 988.18 msec cpu-clock A # 0.987 CPUs utilized
> > 3,153,761,702 cycles A # 3.200 GHz (100.00%)
> > 8,067,769,847 instructions A # 2.57 insn per cycle (100.00%)
> > 982.71 msec cpu-clock B # 0.982 CPUs utilized
> > 3,136,093,298 cycles B # 3.182 GHz (99.99%)
> > 8,109,619,327 instructions B # 2.58 insn per cycle (99.99%)
> >
> > 1.001228054 seconds time elapsed
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>
Powered by blists - more mailing lists