Messages in this thread | | | From | Namhyung Kim <> | Date | Mon, 6 Mar 2023 14:31:19 -0800 | Subject | Re: [PATCH] perf sched: Fix sched latency analysis incorrect |
| |
On Mon, Mar 6, 2023 at 2:05 AM Chunxin Zang <zangchunxin@lixiang.com> wrote: > > > On Mar 4, 2023, at 10:14, Namhyung Kim wrote: > > > > Hello, > > > > On Fri, Mar 3, 2023 at 3:53 AM Chunxin Zang wrote: > >> > >> 'perf sched latency' is incorrect to get process schedule latency > >> when it used 'sched:sched_wakeup' to analysis perf.data. > >> > >> Because 'perf record' prefer use 'sched:sched_waking' to > >> 'sched:sched_wakeup' since commit d566a9c2d482 ("perf sched: Prefer > >> sched_waking event when it exists"). It's very reasonable to > >> evaluate process schedule latency. > >> > >> Similarly, update sched latency/map/replay to use sched_waking events. > > > > Have you checked if it works ok when data has both wakeup and > > waking events? > > > Yes, I used 'perf record -e “sched:* "' to record both wakeup and waking events, > and use fixed perf version to analysis them, the result is correct. > Because the function "latency_wakeup_event” will change atom->state to THREAD_WAIT_CPU > at waking event, and judge the 'atom->state != THREAD_SLEEPING’ is false then returned at wakeup event.
Ok, good.
> > > > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Chunxin Zang > >> Signed-off-by: Jerry Zhou > > > > Missing email addresses. > > > > Otherwise looks good. > > > > Thanks, > > Namhyung > > Maybe the company smtp email server reason, the email address is erased. > Shall I send v2 patch version to fix it?
Yeah, that'd be nice.
Thanks, Namhyung
| |