From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
To: Namhyung Kim <namhyung@kernel.org>,
Stephane Eranian <eranian@google.com>
Cc: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@ghostprotocols.net>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>,
Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org>,
Namhyung Kim <namhyung.kim@lge.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, Jiri Olsa <jolsa@redhat.com>,
David Ahern <dsahern@gmail.com>, Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org>,
Pekka Enberg <penberg@kernel.org>,
Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com>,
Pekka Enberg <penberg@iki.fi>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] perf tools: Record total sampling time
Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2013 13:57:09 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20131202125709.GA22404@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20131202124527.GB22212@gmail.com>
So basically, in the end I think it should be possible to have the
following behavior:
perf record -a -e cycles sleep 1
perf report stat # Reports as if we ran: 'perf stat -a -e cycles sleep 1'
perf report # Reports the usual histogram
perf report --stat # Reports the perf stat output and the histogram
or so.
i.e. a perf.data file would by default always carry enough information
to enable the extraction of the 'perf stat' data.
At that point visualizing it is purely report-time logic, it does not
need any record-time options.
This would work for multi-event sampling as well, if we do:
perf record -a -e cycles -e branches sleep 1
then 'perf report stat' would output the same as:
$ perf stat -e cycles -e branches -a sleep 1
Performance counter stats for 'system wide':
34,174,518 cycles [100.00%]
3,155,677 branches
1.000802852 seconds time elapsed
Another neat feature this kind of workflo enables is the integration
of --repeat to perf record, so something like:
perf record --repeat 3 -a -e cycles -e branches sleep 1
would save 3 samples after each other, and would allow extraction of
the statistical stability of the measurement, and 'perf report stat'
would print the same result as a raw perf stat run would:
$ perf stat --repeat 3 -e cycles -e branches -e instructions -a sleep 1
Performance counter stats for 'system wide' (3 runs):
28,975,150,642 cycles ( +- 0.43% ) [100.00%]
10,740,235,371 branches ( +- 0.47% ) [100.00%]
44,535,464,754 instructions # 1.54 insns per cycle ( +- 0.47% )
1.005718027 seconds time elapsed ( +- 0.43% )
Or something like that. At that point we share reporting between perf
stat and perf report, no special ad-hoc options are needed to just
measure and report timestamps, it would all be a 'natural' side effect
of having perf stat.
What do you think?
Thanks,
Ingo
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-12-02 12:57 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-12-02 6:53 [RFC 0/3] perf tools: Show time info (v1) Namhyung Kim
2013-12-02 6:53 ` [PATCH 1/3] perf tools: Record total sampling time Namhyung Kim
2013-12-02 12:45 ` Ingo Molnar
2013-12-02 12:57 ` Ingo Molnar [this message]
2013-12-02 15:43 ` Namhyung Kim
2013-12-02 16:36 ` Ingo Molnar
2013-12-02 20:24 ` Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
2013-12-03 5:44 ` Namhyung Kim
2013-12-03 14:30 ` David Ahern
2013-12-04 10:00 ` Ingo Molnar
2013-12-04 10:02 ` Ingo Molnar
2013-12-03 5:33 ` Namhyung Kim
2013-12-02 15:05 ` Namhyung Kim
2013-12-02 18:51 ` Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
2013-12-02 6:53 ` [PATCH 2/3] perf tools: Record sampling time for each entry Namhyung Kim
2013-12-02 12:39 ` Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
2013-12-02 14:57 ` Namhyung Kim
2013-12-02 18:49 ` Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
2013-12-03 4:33 ` Namhyung Kim
2013-12-02 6:53 ` [PATCH 3/3] perf report: Add --show-time-info option Namhyung Kim
2013-12-02 12:33 ` Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
2013-12-02 14:38 ` Namhyung Kim
2013-12-02 9:35 ` [RFC 0/3] perf tools: Show time info (v1) Pekka Enberg
2013-12-03 2:28 ` Namhyung Kim
2013-12-02 17:04 ` Andi Kleen
2013-12-03 2:34 ` Namhyung Kim
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20131202125709.GA22404@gmail.com \
--to=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
--cc=acme@ghostprotocols.net \
--cc=andi@firstfloor.org \
--cc=dsahern@gmail.com \
--cc=eranian@google.com \
--cc=fweisbec@gmail.com \
--cc=jolsa@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=namhyung.kim@lge.com \
--cc=namhyung@kernel.org \
--cc=paulus@samba.org \
--cc=penberg@iki.fi \
--cc=penberg@kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.