Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1757166AbcJXFLd (ORCPT ); Mon, 24 Oct 2016 01:11:33 -0400 Received: from LGEAMRELO13.lge.com ([156.147.23.53]:57937 "EHLO lgeamrelo13.lge.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751346AbcJXFLb (ORCPT ); Mon, 24 Oct 2016 01:11:31 -0400 X-Original-SENDERIP: 156.147.1.126 X-Original-MAILFROM: namhyung@kernel.org X-Original-SENDERIP: 165.244.249.26 X-Original-MAILFROM: namhyung@kernel.org X-Original-SENDERIP: 10.177.227.17 X-Original-MAILFROM: namhyung@kernel.org Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2016 14:11:22 +0900 From: Namhyung Kim To: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo CC: Markus Trippelsdorf , , Ingo Molnar , Peter Zijlstra , Jiri Olsa , Taeung Song Subject: Re: Scrolling down broken with "perf top --hierarchy" Message-ID: <20161024051122.GB7720@sejong> References: <20161006163333.GC308@x4> <20161007011753.GA31113@sejong> <20161007035118.GA308@x4> <20161007042218.GE31113@sejong> <20161007043229.GB308@x4> <20161007045357.GF31113@sejong> <20161007143545.GI4809@kernel.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20161007143545.GI4809@kernel.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.7.1 (2016-10-04) X-MIMETrack: Itemize by SMTP Server on LGEKRMHUB07/LGE/LG Group(Release 8.5.3FP6|November 21, 2013) at 2016/10/24 14:11:23, Serialize by Router on LGEKRMHUB07/LGE/LG Group(Release 8.5.3FP6|November 21, 2013) at 2016/10/24 14:11:23, Serialize complete at 2016/10/24 14:11:23 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Disposition: inline Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2853 Lines: 67 Hi Arnaldo, Sorry for late reply. On Fri, Oct 07, 2016 at 11:35:45AM -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote: > Em Fri, Oct 07, 2016 at 01:53:57PM +0900, Namhyung Kim escreveu: > > Cc-ing perf maintainers, > > > > On Fri, Oct 07, 2016 at 06:32:29AM +0200, Markus Trippelsdorf wrote: > > > On 2016.10.07 at 13:22 +0900, Namhyung Kim wrote: > > > > On Fri, Oct 07, 2016 at 05:51:18AM +0200, Markus Trippelsdorf wrote: > > > > > On 2016.10.07 at 10:17 +0900, Namhyung Kim wrote: > > > > > > On Thu, Oct 06, 2016 at 06:33:33PM +0200, Markus Trippelsdorf wrote: > > > > > > > Scrolling down is broken when using "perf top --hierarchy". > > > > > > > When it starts up everything is OK and one can scroll up and down to all > > > > > > > entries. But as further and further new entries get added to the list, > > > > > > > scrolling down is blocked (at the position of the last entry that was > > > > > > > shown directly after startup). > > > > > > > > > > > > I think below patch will fix the problem. Please check. > > > > > > > > > > Yes. It works fine now. Many thanks. > > > > > > > > Good. Can I add your Tested-by then? > > > > > > Sure. > > > > Ok, I'll send a formal patch with it. > > > > > > > > (And in the long run you should think of making "perf top --hierarchy" > > > the default for perf top, because it gives a much better (uncluttered) > > > overview of what is going on.) > > > > I think it's a matter of taste. Some people prefer to see the top > > single function or something (i.e. current behavior) while others > > prefer to see a higher-level view. > > > > But we can think again about the default at least for perf-top. I > > worried about changing default behavior because last time we did it > > for children mode many people complained about it. But I do think the > > hierarchy mode is useful for many people though. > > So, I think in such cases we could experiment with asking the user about > switching to the new mode by showing a popup message telling what it is > about, if the user says "yes, I want to try it" switch to it and if > another hotkey is pressed later, write what was chosen (yes, switch to > this new mode, no, I don't like it, don't pester me about it anymore) to > its ~/.perfconfig file so that next time it goes straight to this new > mode, else don't ask the user again and keep using whatever mode was > there already. > > What do you think? I think it's a flexible way to set the default behavior while it seems like a little bit complicated for implementation. Also I think it's better to popup another dialog at the end and asks for comfirmation (but it might not be appropriate for --stdio). And to do that, we need to have a (programmable) way of dealing with the configs. Taeung, is there an update on your config patchset (especially for write support)? Thanks, Namhyung