Re: [PATCH RFC] Summary of syscall latency

2014-05-28 Thread Dmitry V. Levin
On Tue, May 27, 2014 at 05:44:35PM +0100, Mark Hills wrote: > On Tue, 27 May 2014, Dmitry V. Levin wrote: > > > On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 10:26:11AM +0100, Mark Hills wrote: > > > Time spent in system time is not useful where a syscall depends on some > > > non-CPU resource, eg. typically open() or

Re: [PATCH RFC] Summary of syscall latency

2014-05-27 Thread Mark Hills
On Tue, 27 May 2014, Dmitry V. Levin wrote: > On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 10:26:11AM +0100, Mark Hills wrote: > > Time spent in system time is not useful where a syscall depends on some > > non-CPU resource, eg. typically open() or stat() to a network drive. > > > > This patch adds a -w flag to prod

Re: [PATCH RFC] Summary of syscall latency

2014-05-27 Thread Dmitry V. Levin
On Tue, May 20, 2014 at 10:26:11AM +0100, Mark Hills wrote: > Time spent in system time is not useful where a syscall depends on some > non-CPU resource, eg. typically open() or stat() to a network drive. > > This patch adds a -w flag to produce a summary of the time difference > between beginni

[PATCH RFC] Summary of syscall latency

2014-05-20 Thread Mark Hills
Time spent in system time is not useful where a syscall depends on some non-CPU resource, eg. typically open() or stat() to a network drive. This patch adds a -w flag to produce a summary of the time difference between beginning and end of the system call (ie. latency) This functionality has be