lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2013]   [Oct]   [29]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
SubjectRe: State of "perf: Add a new sort order: SORT_INCLUSIVE"
Date
On Mon, 28 Oct 2013 21:10:38 -0700, Arun Sharma wrote:
> On 10/28/13 8:11 PM, Namhyung Kim wrote:
>
> Hey Namhyung:
>
>>>
>>> Also, what's the reasoning for --cumulate not being an option under
>>> perf record -g ..,<order>?
>>
>> Sorry, I cannot understand you. The 'perf record' just saves sample
>> data (and callchains) from the ring-buffer. All the processing happens
>> in 'perf report'. I can't see what you expect from the 'perf record
>> --cumulate'. Am I missing something?
>
> Yes - I meant to say perf report -g :)

:)

>
>> -g [type,min[,limit],order]
>
> Specifically, along with callee, caller, we could have a third
> option. Or we could have a new type (graph, fractal, cumulative).

That's also fine by me. But I added --cumulate since it's quite
different from other callchain behaviors.

If we go with -g option, I'd like add it as a new type.

>
>>> Given that there are clear use cases in production involving complex
>>> callgraphs, I'm for getting this support in first and then reconciling
>>> the differences with perf record -b later.
>>
>> I think what Frederic said is that the code de-duplication of 'perf
>> report' side. The branch stack and --cumulate are different - branch
>> stack concentrates on the branch itself but --cumulate uses callchains
>> to find parents and give some credit to them as side information.
>
> Me too. I brought it up with Stephane at some point in the last year
> or so and there wasn't an obvious way to de-duplicate because of these
> differences.

Yeah, looking at the code, I can hardly find how I can do it. :-/

Thanks,
Namhyung


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2013-10-29 07:01    [W:0.038 / U:0.032 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site