All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Barros Pena, Belen" <belen.barros.pena@intel.com>
To: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>,
	"toaster@yoctoproject.org" <toaster@yoctoproject.org>,
	openembedded-core <openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org>
Cc: "Bartosh, Eduard" <eduard.bartosh@intel.com>
Subject: Re: FW: [OE-core] [PATCH 6/7] toaster: Update for buildstats changes
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2015 11:34:50 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <D29D9433.6DBEA%belen.barros.pena@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1450436206.8461.29.camel@linuxfoundation.org>



On 18/12/2015 10:56, "Richard Purdie" <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
wrote:

>On Fri, 2015-12-18 at 09:21 +0000, Barros Pena, Belen wrote:
>> I applied the buildstats series on top of toaster-next, ran a build,
>> and
>> checked the build stats info. I can see time per task coming in. I
>> cannot
>> see cpu usage or disk i/o data in the UI because of this
>> 
>> https://bugzilla.yoctoproject.org/show_bug.cgi?id=8571
>> 
>> But there is data for both in the database, and it looks sane. So I
>> guess,
>> from the UI standpoint, the patches are ok: things were as broken as
>> they
>> were before ;)
>
>Thanks Belén!
>
>I was asked what new data was available from buildstats.

Thanks. I've opened an enhancement for this

https://bugzilla.yoctoproject.org/show_bug.cgi?id=8842

Cheers

Belén

>Right now you
>show in toaster:
>
>Task execution time
>CPU usage
>Some IO usage number
>
>I'd note that CPU usage is no longer logged, the reason being that the
>numbers were basically misleading and inaccurate. The raw data in
>buildstats looks like:
>
>Started: 1450427397.44
>quilt-0.64-r0: do_compile: Elapsed time: 0.37 seconds
>utime: 7
>stime: 2
>cutime: 16
>cstime: 7
>IO write_bytes: 1269760
>IO read_bytes: 0
>IO cancelled_write_bytes: 0
>IO syscr: 6165
>IO wchar: 1205445
>IO rchar: 4465276
>IO syscw: 1508
>rusage ru_utime: 0.076
>rusage ru_stime: 0.02
>rusage ru_maxrss: 39684
>rusage ru_minflt: 4618
>rusage ru_majflt: 0
>rusage ru_inblock: 0
>rusage ru_oublock: 32
>rusage ru_nvcsw: 53
>rusage ru_nivcsw: 0
>Child rusage ru_utime: 0.168
>Child rusage ru_stime: 0.076
>Child rusage ru_maxrss: 41180
>Child rusage ru_minflt: 81640
>Child rusage ru_majflt: 0
>Child rusage ru_inblock: 0
>Child rusage ru_oublock: 2448
>Child rusage ru_nvcsw: 988
>Child rusage ru_nivcsw: 352
>Status: PASSED 
>Ended: 1450427397.81
>
>In particular what you can do now is:
>
>a) breakdown filesystem IO usage to reads and writes (read_bytes and
>write_bytes)
>b) show total IO (wchar and rchar)
>
>[difference between filesystem IO and total IO is that there are caches
>in the middle, filesystem IO goes to the physical disk, total IO can be
>from memory - all the reads above were from cache hence 0 read_bytes
>but a large rchar]
>
>c) break down task execution time into "system" (cstime) and "user"
>(cutime) time. Divide those numbers by 100HZ to get seconds. This tells
>us how much time was in the kernel in syscalls and how much doing
>execution in userspace.
>
>d) break down times into parent and child processes (stime and utime
>verses cstime and ustime). The latter includes all children so is a
>total. This is probably less interesting to most users.
>
>e) show the number of voluntary and involuntary context switches
>(ru_nvcsw and ru_nivcsw). Again, the child numbers are totals, you can
>also just get the parent value.
>
>f) there is other data but the above is the pieces I've personally
>found to be interesting/useful.
>
>Some of the numbers are duplicates, e.g. ru_stime is stime/100 (convert
>to seconds) in the parent and child cases. You could do a better CPU
>usage approximation by something like:
>
>(child(ru_stime + ru_utime) / elapsed time) * 100 = % CPU Usage
>
>Hope that makes some kind of sense and that we could expose a bit more
>of this to the user at some point!
>
>Cheers,
>
>Richard
>



WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: "Barros Pena, Belen" <belen.barros.pena@intel.com>
To: Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>,
	"toaster@yoctoproject.org" <toaster@yoctoproject.org>,
	openembedded-core <openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org>
Cc: "Bartosh, Eduard" <eduard.bartosh@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [Toaster] FW: [PATCH 6/7] toaster: Update for buildstats changes
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 2015 11:34:50 +0000	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <D29D9433.6DBEA%belen.barros.pena@intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1450436206.8461.29.camel@linuxfoundation.org>



On 18/12/2015 10:56, "Richard Purdie" <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>
wrote:

>On Fri, 2015-12-18 at 09:21 +0000, Barros Pena, Belen wrote:
>> I applied the buildstats series on top of toaster-next, ran a build,
>> and
>> checked the build stats info. I can see time per task coming in. I
>> cannot
>> see cpu usage or disk i/o data in the UI because of this
>> 
>> https://bugzilla.yoctoproject.org/show_bug.cgi?id=8571
>> 
>> But there is data for both in the database, and it looks sane. So I
>> guess,
>> from the UI standpoint, the patches are ok: things were as broken as
>> they
>> were before ;)
>
>Thanks Belén!
>
>I was asked what new data was available from buildstats.

Thanks. I've opened an enhancement for this

https://bugzilla.yoctoproject.org/show_bug.cgi?id=8842

Cheers

Belén

>Right now you
>show in toaster:
>
>Task execution time
>CPU usage
>Some IO usage number
>
>I'd note that CPU usage is no longer logged, the reason being that the
>numbers were basically misleading and inaccurate. The raw data in
>buildstats looks like:
>
>Started: 1450427397.44
>quilt-0.64-r0: do_compile: Elapsed time: 0.37 seconds
>utime: 7
>stime: 2
>cutime: 16
>cstime: 7
>IO write_bytes: 1269760
>IO read_bytes: 0
>IO cancelled_write_bytes: 0
>IO syscr: 6165
>IO wchar: 1205445
>IO rchar: 4465276
>IO syscw: 1508
>rusage ru_utime: 0.076
>rusage ru_stime: 0.02
>rusage ru_maxrss: 39684
>rusage ru_minflt: 4618
>rusage ru_majflt: 0
>rusage ru_inblock: 0
>rusage ru_oublock: 32
>rusage ru_nvcsw: 53
>rusage ru_nivcsw: 0
>Child rusage ru_utime: 0.168
>Child rusage ru_stime: 0.076
>Child rusage ru_maxrss: 41180
>Child rusage ru_minflt: 81640
>Child rusage ru_majflt: 0
>Child rusage ru_inblock: 0
>Child rusage ru_oublock: 2448
>Child rusage ru_nvcsw: 988
>Child rusage ru_nivcsw: 352
>Status: PASSED 
>Ended: 1450427397.81
>
>In particular what you can do now is:
>
>a) breakdown filesystem IO usage to reads and writes (read_bytes and
>write_bytes)
>b) show total IO (wchar and rchar)
>
>[difference between filesystem IO and total IO is that there are caches
>in the middle, filesystem IO goes to the physical disk, total IO can be
>from memory - all the reads above were from cache hence 0 read_bytes
>but a large rchar]
>
>c) break down task execution time into "system" (cstime) and "user"
>(cutime) time. Divide those numbers by 100HZ to get seconds. This tells
>us how much time was in the kernel in syscalls and how much doing
>execution in userspace.
>
>d) break down times into parent and child processes (stime and utime
>verses cstime and ustime). The latter includes all children so is a
>total. This is probably less interesting to most users.
>
>e) show the number of voluntary and involuntary context switches
>(ru_nvcsw and ru_nivcsw). Again, the child numbers are totals, you can
>also just get the parent value.
>
>f) there is other data but the above is the pieces I've personally
>found to be interesting/useful.
>
>Some of the numbers are duplicates, e.g. ru_stime is stime/100 (convert
>to seconds) in the parent and child cases. You could do a better CPU
>usage approximation by something like:
>
>(child(ru_stime + ru_utime) / elapsed time) * 100 = % CPU Usage
>
>Hope that makes some kind of sense and that we could expose a bit more
>of this to the user at some point!
>
>Cheers,
>
>Richard
>



  reply	other threads:[~2015-12-21 11:34 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 8+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2015-12-17 14:54 [PATCH 6/7] toaster: Update for buildstats changes Richard Purdie
2015-12-18  9:21 ` FW: [OE-core] " Barros Pena, Belen
2015-12-18 10:56   ` Richard Purdie
2015-12-18 10:56     ` [Toaster] FW: " Richard Purdie
2015-12-18 10:56   ` FW: [OE-core] " Richard Purdie
2015-12-18 10:56     ` [Toaster] FW: " Richard Purdie
2015-12-21 11:34     ` Barros Pena, Belen [this message]
2015-12-21 11:34       ` Barros Pena, Belen

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=D29D9433.6DBEA%belen.barros.pena@intel.com \
    --to=belen.barros.pena@intel.com \
    --cc=eduard.bartosh@intel.com \
    --cc=openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org \
    --cc=richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org \
    --cc=toaster@yoctoproject.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.