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 S1753740AbbCYTzs (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Wed, 25 Mar 2015 15:55:48 -0400
Received: from mail-ie0-f180.google.com ([209.85.223.180]:32977 "EHLO
	mail-ie0-f180.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1752369AbbCYTzq (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Wed, 25 Mar 2015 15:55:46 -0400
Message-ID: <551312C0.4060706@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 25 Mar 2015 13:55:44 -0600
From: David Ahern <dsahern@gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.10; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.5.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Don Zickus <dzickus@redhat.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
References: <1427302270-10178-1-git-send-email-dsahern@gmail.com> <20150325191526.GX162412@redhat.com>
In-Reply-To: <20150325191526.GX162412@redhat.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-kernel.vger.kernel.org>
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

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?

Thanks,