Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel+bounces-89024-linux.lists.archive=gmail.com@vger.kernel.org designates 2604:1380:45d1:ec00::1 as permitted sender) client-ip=2604:1380:45d1:ec00::1;
From: Namhyung Kim <namhyung@kernel.org>
To: Ian Rogers <irogers@google.com>,
	Namhyung Kim <namhyung@kernel.org>,
	Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@kernel.org>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>,
	bpf@vger.kernel.org,
	Song Liu <song@kernel.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>,
	LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
	Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@intel.com>,
	Jiri Olsa <jolsa@kernel.org>,
	linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] perf lock contention: Account contending locks too
Date: Fri,  1 Mar 2024 11:30:21 -0800
Message-ID: <170932136988.3731358.12075871779065575043.b4-ty@kernel.org>
In-Reply-To: <20240228053335.312776-1-namhyung@kernel.org>
References: <20240228053335.312776-1-namhyung@kernel.org>
Precedence: bulk
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

On Tue, 27 Feb 2024 21:33:35 -0800, Namhyung Kim wrote:
> Currently it accounts the contention using delta between timestamps in
> lock:contention_begin and lock:contention_end tracepoints.  But it means
> the lock should see the both events during the monitoring period.
> 
> Actually there are 4 cases that happen with the monitoring:
> 
>                 monitoring period
>             /                       \
>             |                       |
>  1:  B------+-----------------------+--------E
>  2:    B----+-------------E         |
>  3:         |           B-----------+----E
>  4:         |     B-------------E   |
>             |                       |
>             t0                      t1
> 
> [...]

Applied to perf-tools-next, thanks!

Best regards,
-- 
Namhyung Kim <namhyung@kernel.org>