On Wed, Nov 06, 2013 at 12:47:01PM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > * Namhyung Kim <namhy...@kernel.org> wrote: > > > On Wed, 6 Nov 2013 09:30:46 +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > > * Namhyung Kim <namhy...@kernel.org> wrote: > > > > > >> Hi Ingo, > > >> > > >> On Tue, 5 Nov 2013 12:58:02 +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > >> > * Namhyung Kim <namhy...@kernel.org> wrote: > > >> >> But the 'cumulative' (btw, I feel a bit hard to type this word..) is > > >> >> different in that it *generates* entries didn't get sampled > > >> >> originally. > > >> >> And as it requires callchains, total field will not work if > > >> >> callchains > > >> >> are missing. > > >> > > > >> > Well, 'total' should disappear if it's not available. > > >> > > >> But what if it's the only sort key user gave? > > > > > > Do you mean something like: > > > > > > -F self,name -s total > > > > > > i.e. if a sort key not displayed? > > > > What I worry is when no -F option was given at all. > > In that case the default list applied, plus whatever new fields are > mentioned in -s would also be added (appended or prepended). > > The display order of columns should _probably_ be something like: > > key1 key2 ... non-key1 non-key2 > > there's not much point in sorting and then displaying the key not in > front, right? > > > > I think sort keys should be automatically added to the displayed > > > fields list. > > > > Agreed. > > > > This problem should be solved if all -s fields are displayed - i.e. > > > they are added to the -F list, right? > > > > But old users might not aware of the new -F option, and use -s option > > only. If so, she will get output like the first example, right? > > Well, there's a default -F list that applies - so this shouldn't be a > problem, agreed? So output should be like the second (expected) example. > > > > Basically there's just a single concept: the -F list. The -s option > > > simply modifies and extends the -F list but internally perf report > > > would not know anything about '-s', it only knows about fields to > > > display and it would know which of those fields are to be sorted and > > > in what order. > > > > > > Does that make sense to you? Does it cover everything needed? > > > > I like the concept. I'm just looking for a way to add it without > > upsetting old users. :) > > If the default -F list matches our current displayed fields list then > there should not be much change in behavior (beyond the addition of total > for call-graph outputs - which can be kept completely separate). > > I'm not too worried about call-graph 'legacies': it generates such huge > perf.data files which is parsed so slowly at the moment that there's very > little user base ... Anyone who absolutely needs call-graph profiling uses > SysProf which performs well.
I'm a bit confused by what will be changed with call-graph here. Also I've seen perf callgraph reports quite often on emails not even related to perf developement. It doesn't appear to me like an irrelevant feature... -- 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/
