From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 60505C352A1 for ; Tue, 6 Dec 2022 22:22:05 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S229690AbiLFWWE (ORCPT ); Tue, 6 Dec 2022 17:22:04 -0500 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:58342 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S229452AbiLFWVx (ORCPT ); Tue, 6 Dec 2022 17:21:53 -0500 Received: from mail-ej1-x62f.google.com (mail-ej1-x62f.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::62f]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 270A63721E for ; Tue, 6 Dec 2022 14:21:53 -0800 (PST) Received: by mail-ej1-x62f.google.com with SMTP id ud5so9798173ejc.4 for ; Tue, 06 Dec 2022 14:21:53 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id :subject:cc:to:from:date:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=TKkFwW/WJj63cceDkNUyxQnWr+gIBDmURWxHFL1Mn58=; b=SpaZqwytEC8qi/eZ9PnrcubRrrYWmbAnqRPB3LAEWHxFEOLArv4hM1q0/XQSpcWW3W wcfQxIdeqMmAGlxwlmok//NY9E+OwvS3BKl5awv/vAVUqP5jrIeLoNVkZ/4LZKDoDjtn nukIse+HPBB26iYWSVuTSwnxV6ZdBX2yln66WwGz/Nh/diIdNOR16GdT2pCQ8Pi3+M7I LrEIlB/ic75lBTiMOgZ39kBWRMA6dM36aBc4BqibWwTXTC6rzmUPkitF9HNZtf2qITxK kc1U6JTpq8BkP3OSL0v5+Xo6eMoiRmm++Ch1E/5sYJ1J974fzrAAL48zlmvfk9n06wp1 VdmQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=in-reply-to:content-disposition:mime-version:references:message-id :subject:cc:to:from:date:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=TKkFwW/WJj63cceDkNUyxQnWr+gIBDmURWxHFL1Mn58=; b=W/10GraKreIaz+ZHc6TqbTpdKZ7NT9usytN/Uf+h/k8YqYv6cSxzgpr7fE3LnpCx3j PLT0STjwoEHQNJhqWgLGhjrS2JxQLNv2yBR6iHDezDj0VGXUD+QyYdLcQtVyA4n4Gu3C UeyTZeXC8bmj6H82r+NoPGOXIZ0uHd0hMyHokC2qhD80Qq1WJ33IH7g69sDKpF+nBT5G c3VGy7OIPWT9kuG2qKdeYye48y5HBwEmHiprsaVdbECaC6Kx5dobzs8Zpmm04Wh9H3lc wJaw7sOgBOyo5RkUwdPVmpFH/Jhs79/XgGqUgYyfqVpU+itZ7LAsbOr01DyLly7t0rzx 0KwA== X-Gm-Message-State: ANoB5pm5XcWLdW72Otnu3BHZ9o7/JjZ4sh3Zh4DS69KXuqD7HUvVTRu6 Rn4aFUsBdovPDYMRjOY6dwo= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AA0mqf7dXIFbhf3bJV1aWUaZvfOa6XL+fDFKStzwyKljz6sQnh/HA7KNNnTX+bYZI6xVs/7A9Vni8g== X-Received: by 2002:a17:906:e2d4:b0:7c1:532:f420 with SMTP id gr20-20020a170906e2d400b007c10532f420mr5694939ejb.679.1670365311249; Tue, 06 Dec 2022 14:21:51 -0800 (PST) Received: from debian ([5.180.62.49]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id g1-20020a17090604c100b0073dc5bb7c32sm7816807eja.64.2022.12.06.14.21.50 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Tue, 06 Dec 2022 14:21:50 -0800 (PST) Date: Tue, 6 Dec 2022 17:21:48 -0500 From: Petar Gligoric To: Namhyung Kim Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Petar Gligoric , Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo , Andi Kleen , Jiri Olsa , Ian Rogers Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/3] perf: introduce perf based task analyzer Message-ID: References: <20221206154406.41941-1-petar.gligor@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Dec 06, 2022 at 10:32:35AM -0800, Namhyung Kim wrote: > Hello, > > Have you looked at 'perf sched timehist' ? > I think it has the common functionality and can be easily extended if there's > missing one. > > Thanks, > Namhyung > Thanks for the input! For this patchset we explicitly decided against extending "perf sched timehist" - after some pros and cons. Mainly we didn't want to break existing programs (which might parse the output of perf sched) and also the goal of the task-analyzer is a bit different. E.g what will follow as a follow-up patch, is to show IRQs visually pleasing intermixed with tasks to show potential sources of task latency. This will be offered as an option for the task-analyzer, but would be too much functionality for "perf sched timehist". This was the main reason why we decided against the extension. Best Regards, Petar