Re: [RFC PATCH 0/3] latencytop lock usage improvement

[Feng Tang]

Hi Peter,

On Tue, Apr 30, 2019 at 11:10:33AM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 30, 2019 at 04:35:05PM +0800, Feng Tang wrote:
> > Hi Peter,
> > 
> > On Tue, Apr 30, 2019 at 10:09:10AM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > > On Mon, Apr 29, 2019 at 04:03:28PM +0800, Feng Tang wrote:
> > > > Hi All,
> > > > 
> > > > latencytop is a very nice tool for tracing system latency hotspots, and
> > > > we heavily use it in our LKP test suites.
> > > 
> > > What data does latency-top give that perf cannot give you? Ideally we'd
> > > remove latencytop entirely.
> > 
> > Thanks for the review. In 0day/LKP test service, we have many tools for
> > monitoring and analyzing the test results, perf is the most important
> > one, which has the most parts in our auto-generated comparing results.   
> > For example to identify spinlock contentions and system hotspots.
> > 
> > latencytop is another tool we used to find why systems go idle, like why
> > workload chose to sleep or waiting for something. 
> 
> You're not answering the question; why can't you use perf for that? ISTR
> we explicitly added support for things like that.

I was not very familiar with perf before. And after my last reply,
I googled a little, and found "perf sched latency" has the simliar
function, except I can't directly get the call chain, any suggestion
for this? thanks!

- Feng