lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2013]   [Dec]   [2]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 1/2] perf sched: Introduce timehist command - v2
On 12/2/13, 12:58 AM, Namhyung Kim wrote:
>> time cpu task name[tid/pid] b/n time sch delay run time
>> ------------- ---- -------------------- --------- --------- ---------
>> 79371.874569 [11] gcc[31949] 0.014 0.000 1.148
>> 79371.874591 [10] gcc[31951] 0.000 0.000 0.024
>> 79371.874603 [10] migration/10[59] 3.350 0.004 0.011
>> 79371.874604 [11] <idle> 1.148 0.000 0.035
>> 79371.874723 [05] <idle> 0.016 0.000 1.383
>> 79371.874746 [05] gcc[31949] 0.153 0.078 0.022
>> ...
>>
>> Times are in msec.usec.
>
> Hmm.. I'm not sure this is right. It probably confuse users since
> timehist_time_str() still uses "sec.usec" format and it looks not
> natural for me to use "msec".
>
> Yeah, I see perf stat uses "msec.usec" for result of clock events but
> AFAICT it also shows the unit explicitly. And perf stat -I uses
> "sec.nsec" format and perf script also uses "sec.usec" format so there's
> a little consistency here.
>
> I think this "msec.usec" format fits well for the scheduling events but
> in general "sec.usec" format looks better IMHO.

Arnaldo / Ingo: any thoughts on the units here? sec.usec versus msec.usec?

David



\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2013-12-02 15:41    [W:0.040 / U:0.432 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site