From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Chulmin Kim Subject: Re: perf top -z not working? Date: Wed, 17 Oct 2012 22:49:42 +0900 Message-ID: <507EB776.9030304@core.kaist.ac.kr> References: <507EA40D.60206@cs.utoronto.ca> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Return-path: Received: from core.kaist.ac.kr ([143.248.147.118]:35150 "EHLO core.kaist.ac.kr" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1757061Ab2JQNuR (ORCPT ); Wed, 17 Oct 2012 09:50:17 -0400 In-Reply-To: <507EA40D.60206@cs.utoronto.ca> Sender: linux-perf-users-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org Cc: Ryan Johnson 2012-10-17 =EC=98=A4=ED=9B=84 9:26, Ryan Johnson =EC=93=B4 =EA=B8=80: > Hi, > > (Please CC me in replies, not a list member) > > It seems that `perf top -z' does not behave as advertized, at least=20 > not on the 3.2.0-25 kernel (Ubuntu) that I'm running. The man page=20 > states that it should "zero history across display updates" but the=20 > counts still seem to accumulate (the total samples reported rises=20 > monotonically) and processes still show up in the display long after=20 > they have exited. Pressing `z' or `Z' seems to have no effect, either= =2E My kernel version is 3.0.0 (ubuntu 11.10). Mine seems to work well. The result was not the accumulated one,=20 definitely. In my opinion, it is a buf in the perf tool in that kernel version. > > Have I misunderstood this feature, or is this a bug that has perhaps=20 > been fixed in later kernel versions? I haven't been successful=20 > searching for information about it, beyond the man pages and what the= =20 > perf wiki says. > > Thanks, > Ryan > > --=20 > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe=20 > linux-perf-users" in > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org > More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html >