From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from mgamail.intel.com (mgamail.intel.com [198.175.65.14]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F402419F13B; Thu, 6 Feb 2025 18:57:49 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=198.175.65.14 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1738868271; cv=none; b=S0qLs+s1/Qikdjsp68QvqjFHKd+4AmLRvUcHtXqi/GIEPjzAGBK5eaDKkwTBcR193DoE1pnbEsXhb0RFXclstI34GZQi3/IVgNuxpG9tqKF6yiRDsb/E5m17dsNYDeS70oIe9ypkqFMLUPqyAz7MdcJ1/Usl7/GMfgiYmIIevrM= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1738868271; c=relaxed/simple; bh=DHM/MNNzBPzxHpZ54WyXj4FW3t1bAt5L0WfNgXiYfho=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=dIxf2ghN2eIFB/RuiSnL1rHyZKlFSi6WiGbXwewv1Fw6aB2VECMPx19m3o0BR4/asrgS0MMKl3iTxPVYqJFsrzquZkw3DU6FKV8qRvcIJcaUjfWdDPwH658q5p49iIfBCS1uOb7ZChgx3yihA19PPxbeEQt+IY1Glo6kuVinh14= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.intel.com; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux.intel.com; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=intel.com header.i=@intel.com header.b=lBaLQQqm; arc=none smtp.client-ip=198.175.65.14 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=linux.intel.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=none smtp.mailfrom=linux.intel.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=intel.com header.i=@intel.com header.b="lBaLQQqm" DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=intel.com; i=@intel.com; q=dns/txt; s=Intel; t=1738868271; x=1770404271; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references: mime-version:in-reply-to; bh=DHM/MNNzBPzxHpZ54WyXj4FW3t1bAt5L0WfNgXiYfho=; b=lBaLQQqmVAErb3HyfDzfeN8ZuRFNU12/W60aBedQYyOoU2o1EYrIalUN 2GhGrsO5lyMbZ3QJIlWSWyBESwPHI7xtUNu2rzDUbKzJW3CRN8+Q8p+22 JIl733tXf2FYqGa11dtX25vRl6+CI+p45YaQWqulTOYq2BAzCuH+l0vc6 uvW0zFvmV9CZ/bXsIhGMgp//Q40kDkxA2RWX/UBORylj4e3m1+juTotpe J7vsEu9vGDZODutbrFdNM5uSi4lXt/J2zGePwx4RlquWYyasd44wtPKGT dlnDZQ5mzUtEY9vJIwSzwak6l4YqzqcDuQQjj1zGLTi2WPLjNsUZIV5e3 Q==; X-CSE-ConnectionGUID: MwPd/lRaTKWGrRaK9lSu6A== X-CSE-MsgGUID: +6bOiuyqSrSiAJ4y/WNfTQ== X-IronPort-AV: E=McAfee;i="6700,10204,11336"; a="43252820" X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.13,265,1732608000"; d="scan'208";a="43252820" Received: from fmviesa003.fm.intel.com ([10.60.135.143]) by orvoesa106.jf.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 06 Feb 2025 10:57:50 -0800 X-CSE-ConnectionGUID: 5Q1UvcHBSayjamZFxc3BJw== X-CSE-MsgGUID: ytJq2VRUQ22lJOeYdS3PAQ== X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="6.12,224,1728975600"; d="scan'208";a="115385592" Received: from tassilo.jf.intel.com (HELO tassilo) ([10.54.38.190]) by fmviesa003-auth.fm.intel.com with ESMTP/TLS/ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 06 Feb 2025 10:57:50 -0800 Date: Thu, 6 Feb 2025 10:57:42 -0800 From: Andi Kleen To: Dmitry Vyukov Cc: namhyung@kernel.org, irogers@google.com, linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo Subject: Re: [PATCH v5 0/8] perf report: Add latency and parallelism profiling Message-ID: References: <87ldujkjsi.fsf@linux.intel.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: On Thu, Feb 06, 2025 at 07:41:00PM +0100, Dmitry Vyukov wrote: > On Thu, 6 Feb 2025 at 19:30, Andi Kleen wrote: > > > > Dmitry Vyukov writes: > > > > > There are two notions of time: wall-clock time and CPU time. > > > For a single-threaded program, or a program running on a single-core > > > machine, these notions are the same. However, for a multi-threaded/ > > > multi-process program running on a multi-core machine, these notions are > > > significantly different. Each second of wall-clock time we have > > > number-of-cores seconds of CPU time. > > > > I'm curious how does this interact with the time / --time-quantum sort key? > > > > I assume it just works, but might be worth checking. > > I will check later. But if you have some concrete commands to try, it > will help. I never used --time-quantum before. perf report --sort time,overhead,sym It just slices perf.data into time slices so you get a time series instead of full aggregation. --time-quantum is optional, but sets the slice length, > > > tools/perf/util/symbol_conf.h | 8 +- > > > > We traditionally didn't do it, but in general test coverage > > of perf report is too low, so I would recommend to add some simple > > test case in the perf test scripts. > > What of this is testable within the current testing framework? You can write a shell script that runs it and does some basic sanity checking. tests/shell has a lot of examples. If you don't do that someone will break it like it happened to some of my features :/ > Also how do I run tests? I failed to figure it out. Just "perf test" -Andi