From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: "Liang, Kan" <kan.liang@intel.com>
Cc: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@redhat.com>, "acme@kernel.org" <acme@kernel.org>,
"eranian@google.com" <eranian@google.com>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
"mingo@redhat.com" <mingo@redhat.com>,
"paulus@samba.org" <paulus@samba.org>,
"ak@linux.intel.com" <ak@linux.intel.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] perf tools: Construct LBR call chain
Date: Wed, 12 Nov 2014 16:05:20 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20141112150520.GE21343@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <37D7C6CF3E00A74B8858931C1DB2F07701661906@SHSMSX103.ccr.corp.intel.com>
On Wed, Nov 12, 2014 at 02:37:13PM +0000, Liang, Kan wrote:
> If the user set lbr, I think he really want the lbr info. So I think if we display
> both lbr and fp, the fp chain might be meaningless and it will confuse them.
> If the user want to do compare, they can do perf record twice with
> different --call-graph.
Or fix the tool to do both. Having both from the exact same context is
far better to compare the quality of the actual backtraces.
But that is not something we have to implement now; but the kernel
interface does allow it.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-11-12 15:05 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-11-06 14:58 [PATCH 0/2] perf tool: Haswell LBR call stack support (user) kan.liang
2014-11-06 14:58 ` [PATCH 1/2] perf tools: enable LBR call stack support kan.liang
2014-11-12 7:50 ` Jiri Olsa
2014-11-12 7:50 ` Jiri Olsa
2014-11-12 14:44 ` Liang, Kan
2014-11-06 14:58 ` [PATCH 2/2] perf tools: Construct LBR call chain kan.liang
2014-11-12 8:58 ` Jiri Olsa
2014-11-12 8:58 ` Jiri Olsa
2014-11-12 8:59 ` Jiri Olsa
2014-11-12 14:37 ` Liang, Kan
2014-11-12 15:05 ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
2014-11-12 18:31 ` Jiri Olsa
2014-11-12 12:33 ` Jiri Olsa
2014-11-10 10:54 ` [PATCH 0/2] perf tool: Haswell LBR call stack support (user) Peter Zijlstra
2014-11-10 14:08 ` Liang, Kan
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=20141112150520.GE21343@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net \
--to=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=acme@kernel.org \
--cc=ak@linux.intel.com \
--cc=eranian@google.com \
--cc=jolsa@redhat.com \
--cc=kan.liang@intel.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@redhat.com \
--cc=paulus@samba.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