Messages in this thread | | | From | Namhyung Kim <> | Date | Wed, 7 Dec 2022 20:59:15 -0800 | Subject | Re: [PATCH v2 0/3] perf: introduce perf based task analyzer |
| |
On Tue, Dec 6, 2022 at 2:21 PM Petar Gligoric <petar.gligor@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Tue, Dec 06, 2022 at 10:32:35AM -0800, Namhyung Kim wrote: > > Hello, > > > > Have you looked at 'perf sched timehist' ? > > I think it has the common functionality and can be easily extended if there's > > missing one. > > > > Thanks, > > Namhyung > > > > Thanks for the input! For this patchset we explicitly decided against > extending "perf sched timehist" - after some pros and cons. Mainly we > didn't want to break existing programs (which might parse the output of > perf sched) and also the goal of the task-analyzer is a bit different. > E.g what will follow as a follow-up patch, is to show IRQs visually > pleasing intermixed with tasks to show potential sources of task > latency. This will be offered as an option for the task-analyzer, but > would be too much functionality for "perf sched timehist". This was the > main reason why we decided against the extension.
Then you might want to add a new sub-command under perf sched. But I guess we can just add a new option for the different output format in the perf sched timehist.
Anyway, "perf script" is a generic tool not targeting specific events. This functionality requires sched_switch (and more?) then we need the record part to make sure the data has the events. That's why it's natural to have it in perf sched IMHO.
Thanks, Namhyung
| |