[lkml]   [2011]   [Mar]   [9]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: [PATCH] perf lock: clean the options for perf record
On 2011年03月04日 23:21, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 04, 2011 at 02:58:19PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>> On Fri, 2011-03-04 at 14:56 +0100, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
>>> lockstat is a global measurement since the boot.
>> You can reset lockstat at any given time.
> Event though, that's still a global profiling. You can't have a per
> process or thread granularity.
> Or even more precise context for some future feature in perf that
> I have in mind and would like to implement soon, like counting/sampling
> an event only between two others. More exactly having two lists for
> each event:
> * activate
> * deactivate
> Those on the first list activate the target event when they overflow. (->start() )
> Those on the second list deactivate .... (->stop() )
> With events in activate and deactivate in the same context than the target,
> locking and permissions should be kept simple. Locking especially shouldn't be
> needed in the fast path. Then if that's needed we could think about a cross
> context things later.
> Plus an attr->start_state that decides if the first ->add() made is made
> with PERF_EF_STAT or not. (We then need to keep track of some activated/deactivated
> state across schedules).
> That's in fact the exclude_irq and exclude_softirq idea extended to any kind
> of existing event.

Do you mean that the event dropping in perf_tp_event_match() should be
extended for filtering hardirq and softirq? If so, it seems good.
I'd like to measure the effectiveness of it.
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2011-03-09 17:43    [W:0.114 / U:2.144 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site