From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Ryan Johnson Subject: Re: perf top -z not working? Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2012 10:10:25 -0400 Message-ID: <508553D1.8040603@cs.utoronto.ca> References: <507EA40D.60206@cs.utoronto.ca> <507EB776.9030304@core.kaist.ac.kr> <20121022014618.GA7924@ghostprotocols.net> <50853311.3040707@cs.utoronto.ca> <50854633.30206@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from bureau84.ns.utoronto.ca ([128.100.132.184]:49412 "EHLO bureau84.ns.utoronto.ca" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754503Ab2JVOK3 (ORCPT ); Mon, 22 Oct 2012 10:10:29 -0400 In-Reply-To: <50854633.30206@gmail.com> Sender: linux-perf-users-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: David Ahern Cc: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo , Chulmin Kim , linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org On 22/10/2012 9:12 AM, David Ahern wrote: > On 10/22/12 5:50 AM, Ryan Johnson wrote: >>>>> It seems that `perf top -z' does not behave as advertized, at >>>>> least not on the 3.2.0-25 kernel (Ubuntu) that I'm running. The >>>>> man page states that it should "zero history across display >>>>> updates" but the counts still seem to accumulate (the total >>>>> samples reported rises monotonically) and processes still show up >>>>> in the display long after they have exited. Pressing `z' or `Z' >>>>> seems to have no effect, either. >>> Are you using the --tui or --stdio interface? Try with both and >>> check if >>> it works in one of them, I bet the problem is with --tui. >> --stdio does the same, so I'll have to try updating my kernel like >> Chulmin suggested (haven't had time to do that yet) > > The kernel has nothing to do with the feature. From builtin-top.c, > this part is either not happening or more likely not happening correctly. > > if (top->zero) > symbol__annotate_zero_histogram(symbol, top->sym_evsel->idx); > else > symbol__annotate_decay_histogram(symbol, top->sym_evsel->idx); > > I recall it working recently - last year or so. Can you try different > versions -- say 3.0, 3.2, 3.4 and latest? If you have a copy of Linus' > tree or Arnaldo's git tree it should not take much time. Chulmin says his 3.0 version works. My 3.2.18 doesn't. I don't have a copy of the git tree on that machine, but I'll try building 3.4.x and tip when I get a chance. I have never built perf-tools before, though, so I'd appreciate tips on what might be different for building perf-tools compared to the kernel, and how to avoid building the standard kernel along the way. Hopefully it's just configure-make-install? Regards, Ryan