From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932431AbbCXQMV (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 Mar 2015 12:12:21 -0400 Received: from mail-wi0-f182.google.com ([209.85.212.182]:33467 "EHLO mail-wi0-f182.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932305AbbCXQMQ (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 Mar 2015 12:12:16 -0400 Date: Tue, 24 Mar 2015 17:12:11 +0100 From: Ingo Molnar To: David Ahern Cc: acme@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Frederic Weisbecker , Peter Zijlstra , Jiri Olsa , Namhyung Kim , Stephane Eranian , Adrian Hunter Subject: Re: [PATCH] perf record: Allow poll timeout to be specified Message-ID: <20150324161210.GA8661@gmail.com> References: <1427213388-127148-1-git-send-email-david.ahern@oracle.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1427213388-127148-1-git-send-email-david.ahern@oracle.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org * David Ahern wrote: > Record currently wakes up based on watermarks to read events from > the mmaps and write them out to the file. The result is a file that > can have large blocks of events per mmap before a finished round > event is added to the stream. This in turn affects the quantity of > events that have to be passed through the ordered events queue > before results can be displayed to the user. For commands like > perf-script this can lead to long unnecessarily long delays before a > user gets output. Large systems (e.g, 1024 cpus) further compound > this effect. I have seen instances where I have to wait 45 minutes > for perf-script to process a 5GB file before any events are shown. > > This patch adds an option to perf-record to allow a user to specify > the poll timeout in msec. For example using 100 msec timeouts > similar to perf-top means the mmaps are traversed much more > frequently leading to a smoother analysis side. Please tune the default value (perhaps influenced by N_PROC?) so that users will get sane behavior without having to specify this option! Thanks, Ingo