On 5 September 2012 22:39, Arjan van de Ven <ar...@linux.intel.com> wrote: > On 9/5/2012 9:56 AM, Rajagopal Venkat wrote: >>> measure1: >>> ev3.start >>> ev1.end <<<<< >> >> evX.end <<<<< >> These events are causing numbers to go wrong. > > but out of a 20 second window.. this is a tiny tiny window... > if you see 100.1% I'd buy this reasoning. > but you're seeing much more than that.
How about generating a report for 1sec duration? Since timestamp itself is added to accumulated_runtime, the usage percentage is really dependent on event end timestamp value. > > >>> >>> if so, then we're loosing events, which is no good. reporting less than 100% >>> is ok, but reporting less than real is not. >> >> I did thought of it. Yes, agree that, we are loosing events for which >> start timestamp > > we can't lose those! > those are the events that give us the initial CPU frequency in the window > etc.... > Yes agree. I will submit the next version patch considering those events end timestamp relative to first_stamp(src/process/do_process.cpp). -- Regards, Rajagopal _______________________________________________ linaro-dev mailing list linaro-dev@lists.linaro.org http://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/linaro-dev
