Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752001Ab0LFNLk (ORCPT ); Mon, 6 Dec 2010 08:11:40 -0500 Received: from e23smtp08.au.ibm.com ([202.81.31.141]:42032 "EHLO e23smtp08.au.ibm.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750823Ab0LFNLj (ORCPT ); Mon, 6 Dec 2010 08:11:39 -0500 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Cc: linux-kernel , Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo , Ingo Molnar , Frederic Weisbecker , Mike Galbraith , Paul Mackerras , Peter Zijlstra , Stephane Eranian Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/3] perf record/report: Process events in order From: Ian Munsie To: Thomas Gleixner In-reply-to: References: <1291603026-11785-4-git-send-email-imunsie@au1.ibm.com> <1291637998-sup-4601@au1.ibm.com> Date: Tue, 07 Dec 2010 00:11:28 +1100 Message-Id: <1291640985-sup-4443@au1.ibm.com> User-Agent: Sup/0.11 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1734 Lines: 39 Excerpts from Thomas Gleixner's message of Tue Dec 07 00:04:20 +1100 2010: > > I just moved them into this routine to keep all the dispatching in one > > place, whether delayed or not. These particular events will still be > > processed immediately when encountered in the file. Only >= > > PERF_RECORD_MMAP && <= PERF_RECORD_SAMPLE will be delayed via the > > perf_session__process_timed function. > > Gah. This is nasty. I really prefer the explicit split of instant > processed and possibly delayed events. That makes the code clear and > easy to extend. I just want to add a new event type at the right place > and not worry about magic comparisions in some other place. Fair enough, I'll split them back out. > > For instance, suppose we ran this on an old kernel without support for > > timestamps on every event (so timestamps are only on sample events): > > > > perf record -T > > perf report > > > > If perf report tried to process the events in order, all the events > > without timestamps would be processed first -- including the > > PERF_RECORD_EXIT event, which would cause every sample not to be > > attributed. Falling back means we should get no worse than the old > > behaviour, while an upgraded kernel will provide the timestamps and > > should not fall back. > > Ok, but you'll break existing code which does only care about sample > ordering if you do that at the session level unconditionally. Good point. I'll give this some thought overnight. Cheers, -Ian -- 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/