From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1753441AbbCYU0c (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Wed, 25 Mar 2015 16:26:32 -0400
Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:60954 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com"
	rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP
	id S1753402AbbCYU03 (ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Wed, 25 Mar 2015 16:26:29 -0400
Date: Wed, 25 Mar 2015 16:26:25 -0400
From: Don Zickus <dzickus@redhat.com>
To: David Ahern <dsahern@gmail.com>
Cc: acme@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        Joe Mario <jmario@redhat.com>, Jiri Olsa <jolsa@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] perf tool: Fix ppid for synthesized fork events
Message-ID: <20150325202625.GC162412@redhat.com>
References: <1427302270-10178-1-git-send-email-dsahern@gmail.com>
 <20150325191526.GX162412@redhat.com>
 <551312C0.4060706@gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <551312C0.4060706@gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

On Wed, Mar 25, 2015 at 01:55:44PM -0600, David Ahern wrote:
> On 3/25/15 1:15 PM, Don Zickus wrote:
> >On Wed, Mar 25, 2015 at 10:51:10AM -0600, David Ahern wrote:
> >>363b785f38 added synthesized fork events and set a thread's parent id
> >>to itself. Since we are already processing /proc/<pid>/status the ppid
> >>can be determined properly. Make it so.
> >>
> >>Performance impact measured on a sparc based T5-8 (1024 CPUs):
> >>$ ps -efL | wc -l
> >>20185
> >>
> >>Current code:
> >>$ time perf record -o perf-no-ppid.data -e cpu-clock -F 1000 -a -v -BN -- usleep 1
> >>mmap size 532480B
> >>[ perf record: Woken up 0 times to write data ]
> >>failed to write feature 9
> >>[ perf record: Captured and wrote 0.000 MB perf-no-ppid.data ]
> >>
> >>real	0m26.144s
> >>user	0m0.452s
> >>sys	0m25.564s
> >>
> >>With PPID patch:
> >>$ time ./perf_ppid record -o perf-ppid.data -e cpu-clock -F 1000 -a -v -BN -- usleep 1
> >>mmap size 532480B
> >>[ perf record: Woken up 0 times to write data ]
> >>failed to write feature 9
> >>[ perf record: Captured and wrote 0.000 MB perf-ppid.data ]
> >>
> >>real	0m25.743s
> >>user	0m0.268s
> >>sys	0m25.368s
> >>
> >>Signed-off-by: David Ahern <dsahern@gmail.com>
> >>Cc: Don Zickus <dzickus@redhat.com>
> >>Cc: Joe Mario <jmario@redhat.com>
> >>Cc: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@redhat.com>
> >>---
> >>v2:
> >>- removed loop in place of 1 read and processing a buffer
> >
> >Hmm, I am not entirely sure this is correct.  You made an optimization that
> >hides the negative impact your patch does.  I would prefer you split this
> >patch into two pieces.  One with the read loop optimization (which I think
> >is great) and the second is your ppid change.
> >
> >I would then like to redo our test with the first patch applied and then
> >both patches applied.
> >
> 
> From your other response I take it you understand the patch now? It
> is a matter of semantics to break this single into 2 -- optimize the
> existing code and then add the ppid. End result will be what this
> patch shows. Before I do that can you /Joe confirm the performance
> is acceptable?

Yes.  I believe Joe will try to find time on Thursday to run this.

Cheers,
Don