From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1753807AbaDWGJq (ORCPT ); Wed, 23 Apr 2014 02:09:46 -0400 Received: from mail-ee0-f48.google.com ([74.125.83.48]:46164 "EHLO mail-ee0-f48.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752219AbaDWGJo (ORCPT ); Wed, 23 Apr 2014 02:09:44 -0400 Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2014 08:09:38 +0200 From: Ingo Molnar To: Namhyung Kim Cc: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo , Jiri Olsa , Peter Zijlstra , Paul Mackerras , Namhyung Kim , LKML , David Ahern , Andi Kleen Subject: Re: [PATCHSET 0/9] perf tools: Fixup for the --percentage change Message-ID: <20140423060938.GA20455@gmail.com> References: <1398156591-11001-1-git-send-email-namhyung@kernel.org> <20140422095557.GB10813@gmail.com> <87k3agsla6.fsf@sejong.aot.lge.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <87k3agsla6.fsf@sejong.aot.lge.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org * Namhyung Kim wrote: > Hi Ingo, > > On Tue, 22 Apr 2014 11:55:57 +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > I gave it some quick testing and after fixing a trivial merge conflict > > in tools/lib/lockdep/Makefile all seems to be working fine. > > Thanks for testing! > > > > > But while looking at it I remembered one of my old UI complains about > > perf top and report, the hard to read nature of: > > > > Event count (approx.): 226958779 > > > > the values displayed are typically way too large to be easily human > > readable. More importantly, they are also nonsensical! That we have a > > sampling interval and can sum up all the intervals sampled has very > > little meaning to the overwhelming majority of humans looking at the > > data. > > > > And printing that just spams the visual field and confuses people. > > > > People care about the quality and speed of sampling itself, not > > directly the interval of sampling (which will often be variable with > > auto-freq sampling). > > You meant 'period' by 'interval', right? Yeah. > There's --show-total-period option (should be equivalent to -F period > later) in perf report, so there might be people want to see the numbers > IMHO. > > > > > So instead of: > > > > Samples: 42K of event 'cycles', Event count (approx.): 226958779 > > > > How about only printing this in 'perf top' and 'perf report': > > > > Captured 42.1K 'cycles' event samples > > > > Note the extra decimal (which helps monitor smaller changes as well), > > and note the different wording. > > > > Thoughts? > > Well, I'm okay to add the extra decimal, but it seems that it only makes > sense when the unit is 'K'.. > > And I think it might be worth adding filtered sample count as well if > filtering is enabled something like: > > Captured 13.2K/42.1K 'cycles' event samples Yeah. Maybe make it: Filtered 13.2K out of 42.1K 'cycles' event samples or so. Thanks, Ingo