Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Date:   Tue, 6 Dec 2022 17:21:48 -0500
From:   Petar Gligoric <petar.gligor@gmail.com>
To:     Namhyung Kim <namhyung@kernel.org>
Cc:     linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        Petar Gligoric <petar.gligoric@rohde-schwarz.com>,
        Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@redhat.com>,
        Andi Kleen <ak@linux.intel.com>, Jiri Olsa <jolsa@kernel.org>,
        Ian Rogers <irogers@google.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 0/3] perf: introduce perf based task analyzer
Message-ID: <Y4/AfA2OYtlTkKwo@debian>
References: <20221206154406.41941-1-petar.gligor@gmail.com>
 <CAM9d7cizPC3p0-Z1oYsDPofwNfZHyKYiJR5JXEcS31Q=mgzcLg@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <CAM9d7cizPC3p0-Z1oYsDPofwNfZHyKYiJR5JXEcS31Q=mgzcLg@mail.gmail.com>
Precedence: bulk

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.

Best Regards,
Petar