lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2010]   [Dec]   [13]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 1/2] perf tools: Add reference timestamp to perf header


On 12/13/10 09:48, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
> Em Mon, Dec 13, 2010 at 04:54:56PM +0100, Frederic Weisbecker escreveu:
>> On Mon, Dec 13, 2010 at 07:39:24AM -0700, David S. Ahern wrote:
>>> On 12/12/10 13:16, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
>>>>> int perf_session__create_kernel_maps(struct perf_session *self)
>>>>> {
>>>>> int ret = machine__create_kernel_maps(&self->host_machine);
>>>>> @@ -167,6 +190,9 @@ struct perf_session *perf_session__new(const char *filename, int mode, bool forc
>>>>> */
>>>>> if (perf_session__create_kernel_maps(self) < 0)
>>>>> goto out_delete;
>>>>> +
>>>>> + if (perf_session__create_ref_time(self) < 0)
>>>>> + goto out_delete;
>
>>>> So, it does record it anytime?
>
>>> Simplest to always add it the header as it does no harm if not used.
>>> To make it conditional means adding an input parameter to
>>> perf_session__new() and then updating all the callers.
>
>>> Is the preference to make it conditional?
>
>> No, I suspect the overhead is plain unnoticeable. And if it becomes
>> any problem one day, we can still make that conditional later.
>
> Right, but it just ocurred to me, can't we encode this in the file stat?

I would not want to rely on stat output for timestamps. eg., copy that
file off box and not have the timestamp preserved.

> Also, how do we deal with:
>
> $ perf record --help
> <SNIP>
> -A, --append
> Append to the output file to do incremental profiling.
> <SNIP>
>
> ?

Is it realistic to expect/allow an append using different perf binaries?
That just seems plain odd. Then, if one invocation used --timehist and
another did not output would be bizarre. Of course an append with a
reboot between tests would cause problems as well.


>
> I now think this should be implemented as a PERF_RECORD_WALL_CLOCK
> synthesized event, to be inserted just before we start collecting the
> other events.
>
> That way, when --appending, we just insert another and use that from
> that point on.
>
> Look at tools/perf/util/event.h, enum perf_user_event_type and look how
> those are synthesized.

I see the thread on this part. I don't have preference; just let me know
what the final decision is. ie., synthesized event versus header entry.

David


>
> Thanks,
>
> - Arnaldo


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2010-12-13 18:39    [W:0.381 / U:0.100 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site