Re: [PATCH 0/4] perf_event: introduce 'perf timer' to analyzetimer's behavior

[Ingo Molnar]

* Xiao Guangrong <xiaoguangrong@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> 
> 
> Ingo Molnar wrote:
> 
> >>>
> >> Yeah, it has different unit and looks ugly :-(
> >>
> >> but, the problem is we can't get HZ in userspace now, i'll export HZ by proc 
> >> or other way and rectify 'perf timer' output in my next work
> > 
> > We could export HZ as part of the ftrace event format file, in 
> > /debug/tracing/events/timers/ or so. Not sure what the best way would be to do 
> > it (without causing runtime overhead in event processing), but we should 
> > reduce our reliance on /proc and export such instrumentation information via a 
> > single, coherent interface.
> 
> Hi ingo,
> 
> Um, if we export this value in tracepoint format, it should add for every 
> timer's tracepoint.

Not if it's a special timer tracepoint 'HZ' dedicated for this. (We might even 
get events through it on dynticks kernels, or on dynamic-sched-tick systems 
[in the future] when the scheduler HZ value gets modified - or so.)

> > There's a couple of other 'system settings' values that would be useful to 
> > expose in such a way - for example the number of online CPUs. (in fact 
> > that could be exposed as a set of online/offline events plus a way to read 
> > the current count as well)
> 
> How about export those values in debugfs/tracing/*? perf tracepoint self 
> depend on this filesystem.

No - in the long run most of those APIs will go away, and what remains are the 
ftrace event format descriptors in essence. (Which we then might move to 
/proc/events/ or so.)

	Ingo
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/