lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2010]   [May]   [31]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
SubjectRe: [PATCH 1/5] perf stat: add perf stat -B to pretty print large numbers
From
Date
On Mon, 31 May 2010 21:30:36 +0200, Stephane Eranian said:
> >> instance LC_NUMERIC=en_US.UTF8. You need to pass -B to activate this
>>> feature. This way existing scripts parsing the output do not need to be
>>> changed. Here is an example.

Two examples, actually...

>>>
>>> $ perf stat noploop 2
>>> noploop for 2 seconds
>>>
>>>  Performance counter stats for 'noploop 2':
>>>
>>>         1998.347031  task-clock-msecs         #      0.998 CPUs
>>>                61  context-switches         #      0.000 M/sec
>>>                   0  CPU-migrations           #      0.000 M/sec
>>>                 118  page-faults              #      0.000 M/sec
>>>       4,138,410,900  cycles                   #   2070.917 M/sec  (scaled from 70.01%)
>>>       2,062,650,268  instructions             #      0.498 IPC    (scaled from 70.01%)
>>>       2,057,653,466  branches                 #   1029.678 M/sec  (scaled from 70.01%)
>>>              40,267  branch-misses            #      0.002 %      (scaled from 30.04%)
>>>       2,055,961,348  cache-references         #   1028.831 M/sec  (scaled from 30.03%)
>>>              53,725  cache-misses             #      0.027 M/sec  (scaled from 30.02%)
>>>
>>>         2.001393933  seconds time elapsed
>>>
>>> $ perf stat -B  noploop 2
>>> noploop for 2 seconds
>>>
>>>  Performance counter stats for 'noploop 2':
>>>
>>>         1998.297883  task-clock-msecs         #      0.998 CPUs
>>>                  59  context-switches         #      0.000 M/sec
>>>                   0  CPU-migrations           #      0.000 M/sec
>>>                 119  page-faults              #      0.000 M/sec
>>>       4,131,380,160  cycles                   #   2067.450 M/sec  (scaled from 70.01%)
>>>       2,059,096,507  instructions             #      0.498 IPC    (scaled from 70.01%)
>>>       2,054,681,303  branches                 #   1028.216 M/sec  (scaled from 70.01%)
>>>              25,650  branch-misses            #      0.001 %      (scaled from 30.05%)
>>>       2,056,283,014  cache-references         #   1029.017 M/sec  (scaled from 30.03%)
>>>              47,097  cache-misses             #      0.024 M/sec  (scaled from 30.02%)
>>>
>>>         2.001391016  seconds time elapsed
>>
>> Is it me, or did -B not make any difference for these two examples?
>> I'm confused.

> Did you set the LC_NUMERIC environement variable?

I meant I was reading the two examples given, and I'm seeing commas in
the same places, -B or not -B. I was sort of expecting that the first
example wouldn't have commas in it, or something? Or were those two
examples *supposed* to be identical, and there's a not-shown 3rd example
that shows what you get if you use -B and set the LC_NUMERIC variable?
[unhandled content-type:application/pgp-signature]
\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2010-05-31 22:55    [W:0.065 / U:37.632 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site