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 produce a summary of the time difference > > between beginning and end of the system call (ie. latency) > > > > This functionality has been useful to profile slow processes that are not > > CPU-bound. > > > > An older commit 8050cdc mentions this: > > > > > It might be useful to have a mode where we show wall clock time spent in > > > syscalls, not CPU time. It might also be more accurate. > > > > I'm not sure how reasonably useful the crude profile of CPU "system time" > > is. Is it better to replace the existing functionality with > > wallclock/latency time, or does this justify the introduction of a new > > flag, as below? > > I think a new behavior justifies a new flag. Another option is to treat > the same -c/-C option given twice as a request for this new behavior.
In which case the -w flag seems reasonable; given the two existing flags I think the variations would be confusing for -c/-C given twice. I'll prepare the final patch and send it. I assume I should add Signed-off-by and a NEWS entry. -- Mark ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ The best possible search technologies are now affordable for all companies. Download your FREE open source Enterprise Search Engine today! Our experts will assist you in its installation for $59/mo, no commitment. Test it for FREE on our Cloud platform anytime! http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=145328191&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk _______________________________________________ Strace-devel mailing list Strace-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/strace-devel
