From: Milian Wolff <milian.wolff@kdab.com>
To: shiny.sebastian@intel.com
Cc: linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Perf report --percentage
Date: Wed, 08 Jun 2016 09:34:58 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1936512.XMEGsyMYkf@agathebauer> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <6076A35470B38B408600AA0E3B4A31E767471A9E@ORSMSX114.amr.corp.intel.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 4075 bytes --]
On Dienstag, 7. Juni 2016 19:21:15 CEST Sebastian, Shiny wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I work with Intel and am running perf tool within Linux VMs on Windows
> Hyper-V. With kernel 4.6 and corresponding perf version, percentages of
> call stacks at deeper levels do not seem to add up to 100% or parent value
> (26.97%): example below. I have tried the -percentage flag with both
> 'absolute' and 'relative' values and they don't seem to change the output
> at all. Is this a bug or something wrong with my perf flags ?
>
> Commands used:
> #perf record -a -g -c 10000 sleep 10
> #perf report -i cpu3.data.old -C 1 --no-children
>
> - 27.48% fio [kernel.kallsyms] [k] __softirqentry_text_start
> __softirqentry_text_start
> - irq_exit
> - 26.97% smp_call_function_single_interrupt
> - call_function_single_interrupt
> + 4.21% __blk_run_queue
> + 4.09% hv_ringbuffer_write
> + 1.83% 0x99c
> + 1.78% __blockdev_direct_IO
> + 0.96% do_blockdev_direct_IO
> + 0.95% generic_make_request
> + 0.86% blk_queue_bio
> + 0.70% iov_iter_get_pages
> + 0.64% md_make_request
> + 0.55% do_io_submit
> 0.51% entry_SYSCALL_64_fastpath
> + 0.51% hyperv_vector_handler
Can you try to look at the output of
perf report -i cpu3.data.old -C 1 --no-children -g graph,0
i.e. potentially there are more entries with a cost of 0.5% or less, which by
default falls below the threshold.
That said, I just tested it and it doesn't work for me either:
tmp$ perf record --call-graph dwarf kwrite
[ perf record: Woken up 65 times to write data ]
[ perf record: Captured and wrote 16.308 MB perf.data (2032 samples) ]
tmp$ perf report -g graph,0 --no-children
- 9.47% kwrite ld-2.23.so [.] do_lookup_x
- 2.21% do_lookup_x
- _dl_lookup_symbol_x
+ 1.42% _dl_relocate_object
+ 0.74% _dl_fixup
+ 7.06% kwrite ld-2.23.so [.] strcmp
It's also bogus when I look at it with --children:
- 10.76% 9.47% kwrite ld-2.23.so [.] do_lookup_x
+ 1.54% _start
+ 1.34% do_lookup_x
+ 0.61% _dl_runtime_resolve_avx
- 7.06% 7.06% kwrite ld-2.23.so [.] strcmp
+ 0.42% _start
+ 0.22% _dl_runtime_resolve_avx
So someone else with more insight should answer whether this output can be
explained somehow.
> Older version: Perf version 4.2 on kernel 4.2 - seems to normalize them to
> 100%. 27.69% swapper [kernel.kallsyms] [k] intel_idle
>
> ---intel_idle
>
> |--99.84%-- cpuidle_enter_state
> |
> | cpuidle_enter
> | call_cpuidle
> | cpu_startup_entry
> |
> | |--97.27%-- start_secondary
> | |
> | --2.73%-- rest_init
> |
> | start_kernel
> | x86_64_start_reservations
> | x86_64_start_kernel
>
> --0.16%-- [...]
This output can be reproduced on newer perf by passing `-g fractal` to `perf
report`. I still get the issues as shown above though with a newer perf:
- 9.47% kwrite ld-2.23.so [.] do_lookup_x
+ 23.31% do_lookup_x
- 7.06% kwrite ld-2.23.so [.] strcmp
+ 9.06% strcmp
+ 5.71% kwrite ld-2.23.so [.] check_match
I.e. ~74% and 91% of the samples don't seen to have a proper backtrace
attribution?
Cheers
--
Milian Wolff | milian.wolff@kdab.com | Software Engineer
KDAB (Deutschland) GmbH&Co KG, a KDAB Group company
Tel: +49-30-521325470
KDAB - The Qt Experts
[-- Attachment #2: smime.p7s --]
[-- Type: application/pkcs7-signature, Size: 5903 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-06-08 7:35 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-06-07 19:21 Perf report --percentage Sebastian, Shiny
2016-06-08 7:34 ` Milian Wolff [this message]
2016-06-08 16:21 ` Sebastian, Shiny
2016-06-11 8:31 ` Namhyung Kim
2016-06-11 11:53 ` Milian Wolff
2016-06-12 13:55 ` Namhyung Kim
2016-06-13 11:01 ` Milian Wolff
2016-06-09 15:13 ` Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
2016-06-10 3:14 ` 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=1936512.XMEGsyMYkf@agathebauer \
--to=milian.wolff@kdab.com \
--cc=linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=shiny.sebastian@intel.com \
/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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).