Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2009 01:50:23 +0900 (JST)
Message-Id: <20091110.015023.244106360.mitake@dcl.info.waseda.ac.jp>
To: mingo@elte.hu
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, rusty@rustcorp.com.au, tglx@linutronix.de,
       a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl, efault@gmx.de, acme@redhat.com,
       fweisbec@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/7] Adding general performance benchmarking
 subcommand to perf.
From: Hitoshi Mitake <mitake@dcl.info.waseda.ac.jp>
In-Reply-To: <20091109075512.GG453@elte.hu>
References: <20091108113013.GM11372@elte.hu>
	<20091109.122712.865412965745306501.mitake@dcl.info.waseda.ac.jp>
	<20091109075512.GG453@elte.hu>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 3009
Lines: 90

From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/7] Adding general performance benchmarking subcommand to perf.
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2009 08:55:12 +0100

> 
> * Hitoshi Mitake <mitake@dcl.info.waseda.ac.jp> wrote:
> 
> > From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
> > Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 3/7] Adding general performance benchmarking subcommand to perf.
> > Date: Sun, 8 Nov 2009 12:30:13 +0100
> > 
> > > > > 
> > > > > Shouldnt we output the unit of measurement, i.e. '4.575 usecs'? Also, we 
> > > > > should perhaps print something like:
> > > > > 
> > > > >   % perf bench sched pipe
> > > > > 
> > > > >   (executing 1000000 pipe operations between two tasks)
> > > > > 
> > > > >      4.575 usecs per op
> > > > >     218579 ops/sec   
> > > > > 
> > > > > ?
> > > > 
> > > > I have to admit that single float value output is too simple.
> > > > So I'll fix the default output.
> > > > 
> > > > But, I believe that simple form makes sense for
> > > > processing by scripts or graph tools like gnuplot.
> > > > I'll add the option (may be --simple) to switch
> > > > friendliness of outputs.
> > > 
> > > Btw., could you make it Git-ish, i.e.:
> > > 
> > >  --format=short
> > > 
> > > or:
> > > 
> > >  --format=simple
> > > 
> > > Eventually more format options might be added.
> > 
> > It's good idea.
> > I have to admit that reserving -s for simple output is not good idea.
> > I'll do this.
> 
> I think --format=simple will be used by scripts mostly, so it doesnt 
> matter that it's longer to type. We try to save the shorter options for 
> humans and be conservative with them.
> 
> Another angle is coherency between different subcommands - and '-s' is 
> already used as -s/--sort in other perf subcommands, which does not 
> match up with the '-s/--simple' usage.
> 
> We try to match what the Git project does here - a good deal of 
> infrastructure code in perf came from Git and i find Git very easy to 
> use and it's managed well.
> 
> It's not a hard rule: not all option name incoherencies are fixable or 
> avoidable, and there's no big problem if something slips in - i just 
> wanted to mention so that you can keep an eye on it when developing new 
> features for perf bench.
> 
> 	Ingo
> 

I added --format as option of bench subcommand,
not of each suites.
Because I thought that flavors of formatting are common thing
across the suites.

Example of use:
% ./perf bench sched pipe           # with no style specify
(executing 1000000 pipe operations between two tasks)

        Total time:5.855 sec
                5.855061 usecs/op
                170792 ops/sec
% ./perf bench --format=simple sched pipe # specified simple
               ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^	# <- --format is here
5.988

How do you think?
I'll send patch series later.

--
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/