[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <YIa3vXJrVwN44mjx@kernel.org>
Date: Mon, 26 Apr 2021 09:53:17 -0300
From: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>
To: Andi Kleen <ak@...ux.intel.com>
Cc: Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>, Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@....com>,
Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Ian Rogers <irogers@...gle.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCHSET 0/5] perf report: Make --stat output more compact
Em Sun, Apr 25, 2021 at 09:31:47PM -0700, Andi Kleen escreveu:
> > Hmm.. do you want something like this?
> > TOTAL events: 20064
> > MMAP events: 239 ( 1.2%)
> > COMM events: 1518 ( 7.6%)
> > EXIT events: 1 (0.0%)
> > FORK events: 1517 (7.6%)
> > SAMPLE events: 4015 (20.0%)
> > MMAP2 events: 12769 (63.6%)
> Yes that's it.
> Really shows how inefficient perf is for short measurement
> periods.
Brainstorming a bit:
Yeah, I wonder if we could have a new mode where 'perf daemon' collects
the !SAMPLE records and then a 'perf record' would collect just
PERF_RECORD_SAMPLEs, and then 'perf report' would merge things up.
A perf.data file cap for the 'perf daemon' would mean that when a 'perf
report' result looks interesting, one could press a hotkey and generate
a complete perf.data file with the !SAMPLE records needed to have it
self sufficient.
Additionally maybe we could have 'perf daemon' providing a interface to
resolve samples, returning unresolved ones for older stuff.
wdyt?
- Arnaldo
Powered by blists - more mailing lists