Re: [PATCH V9 8/8] perf tools: handle PERF_RECORD_LOST_SAMPLES

[Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@kernel.org>]

Em Mon, May 11, 2015 at 08:40:56PM +0000, Liang, Kan escreveu:
> > Em Sun, May 10, 2015 at 03:13:15PM -0400, Kan Liang escreveu:
> > > $ perf record -e '{cycles:p,instructions:p}' -c 20003 --no-time
> > > ~/tchain ~/tchain [perf record: Woken up 148 times to write data]
> > > [perf record: Captured and wrote 36.922 MB perf.data (1206322
> > > samples)]

> > > $ perf report -D | tail
> > >           SAMPLE events:     120243
> > >            MMAP2 events:          5
> > >     LOST_SAMPLES events:         24
> > >   FINISHED_ROUND events:         15
> > > cycles:p stats:
> > >            TOTAL events:      59348
> > >           SAMPLE events:      59348
> > > instructions:p stats:
> > >            TOTAL events:      60895
> > >           SAMPLE events:      60895

> > The example doesn't show which of cycles:p or instructions:p got lost, isn't
> > that possible? Guess not from the patch, but should, no? I.e. what is
> > PERF_SAMPLE_ID for then?
 
> Yes, it's possible to know the lost samples number for cycles:p or
> instructions:p. But I didn't implement it in the summary of perf report -D.
> I think a total lost_samples number is enough for user. What they really
> care about should be the total samples drop rate. 
> (If they really want to know the number of which event got lost, they can
> search LOST_SAMPLES in perf report -D. sample->id is dumped with lost
> number.) 

I disagree, since the support is there, we need to have it in
hists->events_stats[PERF_RECORD_LOST_SAMPLES].

But that can be done in a follow up patch.

It just came quickly to my attention because of all the discussion about
where to store something (PERF_SAMPLE_ID via sample_type + sample_id_all)
that doesn't get used in the patch that introduces it :-)

I'll try to test this all tomorrow and will try to do the needed wiring
to hists_evsel->hists->events_stats.

All working I can push this all via my perf/core event, if PeterZ
agrees and is ok with the kernel specific bits.

- Arnaldo