From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
To: Namhyung Kim <namhyung@kernel.org>,
Stephane Eranian <eranian@google.com>
Cc: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@ghostprotocols.net>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>,
Paul Mackerras <paulus@samba.org>,
Namhyung Kim <namhyung.kim@lge.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, Jiri Olsa <jolsa@redhat.com>,
David Ahern <dsahern@gmail.com>, Andi Kleen <andi@firstfloor.org>,
Pekka Enberg <penberg@kernel.org>,
Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@gmail.com>,
Pekka Enberg <penberg@iki.fi>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/3] perf tools: Record total sampling time
Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2013 13:57:09 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20131202125709.GA22404@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20131202124527.GB22212@gmail.com>
So basically, in the end I think it should be possible to have the
following behavior:
perf record -a -e cycles sleep 1
perf report stat # Reports as if we ran: 'perf stat -a -e cycles sleep 1'
perf report # Reports the usual histogram
perf report --stat # Reports the perf stat output and the histogram
or so.
i.e. a perf.data file would by default always carry enough information
to enable the extraction of the 'perf stat' data.
At that point visualizing it is purely report-time logic, it does not
need any record-time options.
This would work for multi-event sampling as well, if we do:
perf record -a -e cycles -e branches sleep 1
then 'perf report stat' would output the same as:
$ perf stat -e cycles -e branches -a sleep 1
Performance counter stats for 'system wide':
34,174,518 cycles [100.00%]
3,155,677 branches
1.000802852 seconds time elapsed
Another neat feature this kind of workflo enables is the integration
of --repeat to perf record, so something like:
perf record --repeat 3 -a -e cycles -e branches sleep 1
would save 3 samples after each other, and would allow extraction of
the statistical stability of the measurement, and 'perf report stat'
would print the same result as a raw perf stat run would:
$ perf stat --repeat 3 -e cycles -e branches -e instructions -a sleep 1
Performance counter stats for 'system wide' (3 runs):
28,975,150,642 cycles ( +- 0.43% ) [100.00%]
10,740,235,371 branches ( +- 0.47% ) [100.00%]
44,535,464,754 instructions # 1.54 insns per cycle ( +- 0.47% )
1.005718027 seconds time elapsed ( +- 0.43% )
Or something like that. At that point we share reporting between perf
stat and perf report, no special ad-hoc options are needed to just
measure and report timestamps, it would all be a 'natural' side effect
of having perf stat.
What do you think?
Thanks,
Ingo
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2013-12-02 12:57 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 26+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2013-12-02 6:53 [RFC 0/3] perf tools: Show time info (v1) Namhyung Kim
2013-12-02 6:53 ` [PATCH 1/3] perf tools: Record total sampling time Namhyung Kim
2013-12-02 12:45 ` Ingo Molnar
2013-12-02 12:57 ` Ingo Molnar [this message]
2013-12-02 15:43 ` Namhyung Kim
2013-12-02 16:36 ` Ingo Molnar
2013-12-02 20:24 ` Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
2013-12-03 5:44 ` Namhyung Kim
2013-12-03 14:30 ` David Ahern
2013-12-04 10:00 ` Ingo Molnar
2013-12-04 10:02 ` Ingo Molnar
2013-12-03 5:33 ` Namhyung Kim
2013-12-02 15:05 ` Namhyung Kim
2013-12-02 18:51 ` Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
2013-12-02 6:53 ` [PATCH 2/3] perf tools: Record sampling time for each entry Namhyung Kim
2013-12-02 12:39 ` Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
2013-12-02 14:57 ` Namhyung Kim
2013-12-02 18:49 ` Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
2013-12-03 4:33 ` Namhyung Kim
2013-12-02 6:53 ` [PATCH 3/3] perf report: Add --show-time-info option Namhyung Kim
2013-12-02 12:33 ` Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
2013-12-02 14:38 ` Namhyung Kim
2013-12-02 9:35 ` [RFC 0/3] perf tools: Show time info (v1) Pekka Enberg
2013-12-03 2:28 ` Namhyung Kim
2013-12-02 17:04 ` Andi Kleen
2013-12-03 2:34 ` 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=20131202125709.GA22404@gmail.com \
--to=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl \
--cc=acme@ghostprotocols.net \
--cc=andi@firstfloor.org \
--cc=dsahern@gmail.com \
--cc=eranian@google.com \
--cc=fweisbec@gmail.com \
--cc=jolsa@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=namhyung.kim@lge.com \
--cc=namhyung@kernel.org \
--cc=paulus@samba.org \
--cc=penberg@iki.fi \
--cc=penberg@kernel.org \
/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