Re: [PATCHv2 00/25] perf tool: Add support for multiple data file storage

From: Namhyung Kim
Date: Tue Sep 10 2013 - 04:57:27 EST


Hi Peter and Jiri,

On Mon, 9 Sep 2013 13:17:49 +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 01, 2013 at 12:36:11PM +0200, Jiri Olsa wrote:
>> hi,
>> sending the support for multiple file storage. Initial
>> RFC is here:
>> http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=137408381902423&w=2
>>
>> v2 changes:
>> - reworked perf mmap size setup to be able to get
>> the mmap size value easily later
>> - added perf.data read/write test for v2 and v3
>> for both endianity
>> - added record '-M time' support
>
> So this 0/n post seems to have forgotten to list the rationale for doing
> all this..
>
> The only reason I wanted this is so that each thread can write its own
> data. The current one file thing is an immense bottle-neck for big
> machines.

Per-thread or per-cpu? In my perf ftrace patchset, I used to per-cpu
data file for this reason. Do you think per-thread approach is better
than per-cpu one?

Jiri, one of my colleagues asked me about the multiple file support
separated by time while ago. At that time I just added --time-filter
option to perf report, but it'd better if perf record can support it.
(Unfortunately the patch seems to buried in the list).

Anyway, as Peter said, please consider per-thread or per-cpu multiple
file support with your series. It will help further developments.

Thanks,
Namhyung
--
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/