From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Alex Bagehot Subject: Re: Comparing output of two perf cpu profiling reports Date: Thu, 28 Apr 2016 14:30:50 +0100 Message-ID: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Return-path: Received: from mail-oi0-f66.google.com ([209.85.218.66]:35080 "EHLO mail-oi0-f66.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752217AbcD1Nav (ORCPT ); Thu, 28 Apr 2016 09:30:51 -0400 Received: by mail-oi0-f66.google.com with SMTP id w198so9963852oiw.2 for ; Thu, 28 Apr 2016 06:30:51 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-perf-users-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: To: Mark Davis Cc: linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org Hi Mark, Differential flame graphs is one way: http://www.brendangregg.com/blog/2014-11-09/differential-flame-graphs.html Thanks, Alex On Thu, Apr 28, 2016 at 2:27 PM, Mark Davis wrote: > Hi, what is the recommend way to compare two different perf reports > from CPU event profiling (via sampling with perf record)? I'm > comparing two macro benchmarks, with a couple small implementation > details between the two. Right now I'm manually comparing the output > of perf report to determine the salient differences. However, I'm > wondering if there's a tool or otherwise best practice to essentially > "diff" the two outputs. I could just use diff on the --stdio version > of the reports, but sometimes lines get mangled and I loose > context/hierarchy. > > Any tips? > > Mark > -- > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe 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