All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: namhyung@kernel.org
To: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@redhat.com>
Cc: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@kernel.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
	Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>,
	Mark Rutland <mark.rutland@arm.com>,
	Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Stephane Eranian <eranian@google.com>,
	Ian Rogers <irogers@google.com>, Al Grant <al.grant@foss.arm.com>,
	Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] perf inject: Flush ordered events on FINISHED_ROUND
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 2020 11:39:49 +0900	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20201006023949.GA1682192@google.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAM9d7cgsxkefHAgyMf-GoP4-OdSsaRmhSGLwPMoYn=-c9YXxDw@mail.gmail.com>

> > On Fri, Oct 02, 2020 at 10:03:17PM +0900, Namhyung Kim wrote:
> > > Below measures time and memory usage during the perf inject and
> > > report using ~190MB data file.
> > >
> > > Before:
> > >   perf inject:  11.09 s,  382148 KB
> > >   perf report:   8.05 s,  397440 KB
> > >
> > > After:
> > >   perf inject:  16.24 s,   83376 KB
> > >   perf report:   7.96 s,  216184 KB
> > >
> > > As you can see, it used 2x memory of the input size.  I guess it's
> > > because it needs to keep the copy for the whole input.  But I don't
> > > understand why processing time of perf inject increased..

Measuring it with time shows:

           before       after
  real    11.309s     17.040s
  user     8.084s     13.940s
  sys      6.535s      6.732s

So it's user space to make the difference.  I've run perf record on
both (with cycles:U) and the dominant function is same: queue_event.
(46.98% vs 65.87%)

It seems the flushing the queue makes more overhead on sorting.

Thanks
Namhyung

  reply	other threads:[~2020-10-06  2:39 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-10-02 13:03 [PATCH] perf inject: Flush ordered events on FINISHED_ROUND Namhyung Kim
2020-10-04 19:52 ` Jiri Olsa
2020-10-06  1:28   ` Namhyung Kim
2020-10-06  2:39     ` namhyung [this message]
2020-10-06  5:40       ` namhyung
2020-10-08  9:06         ` Jiri Olsa
2020-10-12  5:04           ` 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=20201006023949.GA1682192@google.com \
    --to=namhyung@kernel.org \
    --cc=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
    --cc=acme@kernel.org \
    --cc=adrian.hunter@intel.com \
    --cc=al.grant@foss.arm.com \
    --cc=alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com \
    --cc=eranian@google.com \
    --cc=irogers@google.com \
    --cc=jolsa@redhat.com \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=mark.rutland@arm.com \
    --cc=mingo@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.