On Mon, 28 Oct 2013 21:10:38 -0700, Arun Sharma wrote: > On 10/28/13 8:11 PM, Namhyung Kim wrote: > > Hey Namhyung: > >>> >>> Also, what's the reasoning for --cumulate not being an option under >>> perf record -g ..,<order>? >> >> Sorry, I cannot understand you. The 'perf record' just saves sample >> data (and callchains) from the ring-buffer. All the processing happens >> in 'perf report'. I can't see what you expect from the 'perf record >> --cumulate'. Am I missing something? > > Yes - I meant to say perf report -g :)
:) > >> -g [type,min[,limit],order] > > Specifically, along with callee, caller, we could have a third > option. Or we could have a new type (graph, fractal, cumulative). That's also fine by me. But I added --cumulate since it's quite different from other callchain behaviors. If we go with -g option, I'd like add it as a new type. > >>> Given that there are clear use cases in production involving complex >>> callgraphs, I'm for getting this support in first and then reconciling >>> the differences with perf record -b later. >> >> I think what Frederic said is that the code de-duplication of 'perf >> report' side. The branch stack and --cumulate are different - branch >> stack concentrates on the branch itself but --cumulate uses callchains >> to find parents and give some credit to them as side information. > > Me too. I brought it up with Stephane at some point in the last year > or so and there wasn't an obvious way to de-duplicate because of these > differences. Yeah, looking at the code, I can hardly find how I can do it. :-/ Thanks, Namhyung -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
