Date: Fri, 12 Jun 2015 14:09:38 +0200
From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@intel.com>
Cc: Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com>,
        Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@kernel.org>,
        Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        Jiri Olsa <jolsa@redhat.com>, Stephane Eranian <eranian@google.com>,
        mathieu.poirier@linaro.org, Pawel Moll <pawel.moll@arm.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] perf: Add PERF_RECORD_SWITCH to indicate context
 switches
Message-ID: <20150612120938.GS3644@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
References: <1433859670-10806-1-git-send-email-adrian.hunter@intel.com>
 <20150611141548.GW19282@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
 <557ABE8B.1020705@intel.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <557ABE8B.1020705@intel.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2012-12-30)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1653
Lines: 41

On Fri, Jun 12, 2015 at 02:12:11PM +0300, Adrian Hunter wrote:
> On 11/06/15 17:15, Peter Zijlstra wrote:

> > Right, so the one wee problem I have is that this only provides sched_in
> > data, I imagine people might be interested in sched_out as well.
> 
> That is not a problem although it would be interesting to know the use-case.
> To me it seemed unreasonable to expect to analyze scheduler behaviour
> without admin-level privileges since it is inherently an administrative
> activity.

I was more thinking about it being used to track event duration inside a
task. Say you want measure the time between event A and event B but got
scheduled out in between.

	---- A ----] .... [---- B -----

If you do not have the sched_out time, you cannot correct for that.

> > all 3 are already part of sample_id.
> 
> You have to decide whether you expect to be able to use an event without
> sample_id. MMAP and MMAP2 both have pid, tid which are in sample_id, LOST
> has id, EXIT and FORK have time, all of the THROTTLE/UNTHROTTLE members are
> in sample_id etc. So it currently looks like we expect to be able to use an
> event without requiring sample_id.

I think we recently had this discussion:

  lkml.kernel.org/r/1430940834-8964-8-git-send-email-kan.liang@intel.com

The patch we ended up merging:

  f38b0dbb491a ("perf/x86/intel: Introduce PERF_RECORD_LOST_SAMPLES")

Does indeed require sample_id.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/