From: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@infradead.org>
To: Ingo Molnar <mingo@kernel.org>
Cc: acme@kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
andi@firstfloor.org, eranian@google.com, jolsa@kernel.org,
torvalds@linux-foundation.org, davidcc@google.com,
alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com, namhyung@kernel.org,
kan.liang@intel.com, khandual@linux.vnet.ibm.com
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 7/7] perf/annotate: Add branch stack / basic block information
Date: Fri, 8 Jul 2016 18:36:32 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20160708163632.GK30927@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20160708162733.GJ30909@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net>
On Fri, Jul 08, 2016 at 06:27:33PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> I've been thinking of filtering all targets and branches that are
> smaller than 0.1% in order to avoid this, but so far I've just been
> ignoring these things.
Like so... seems to 'work'.
---
tools/perf/util/annotate.c | 45 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------------------
1 file changed, 26 insertions(+), 19 deletions(-)
diff --git a/tools/perf/util/annotate.c b/tools/perf/util/annotate.c
index 8eeb151..c78b16f0 100644
--- a/tools/perf/util/annotate.c
+++ b/tools/perf/util/annotate.c
@@ -907,6 +907,7 @@ static void annotate__branch_printf(struct block_range *br, u64 addr)
#if 1
if (br->is_target && br->start == addr) {
struct block_range *branch = br;
+ double p;
/*
* Find matching branch to our target.
@@ -914,31 +915,37 @@ static void annotate__branch_printf(struct block_range *br, u64 addr)
while (!branch->is_branch)
branch = block_range__next(branch);
- if (emit_comment) {
- emit_comment = false;
- printf("\t#");
- }
+ p = 100 *(double)br->entry / branch->coverage;
- /*
- * The percentage of coverage joined at this target in relation
- * to the next branch.
- */
- printf(" +%.2f%%", 100*(double)br->entry / branch->coverage);
+ if (p > 0.1) {
+ if (emit_comment) {
+ emit_comment = false;
+ printf("\t#");
+ }
+
+ /*
+ * The percentage of coverage joined at this target in relation
+ * to the next branch.
+ */
+ printf(" +%.2f%%", p);
+ }
}
#endif
if (br->is_branch && br->end == addr) {
+ double p = 100*(double)br->taken / br->coverage;
- if (emit_comment) {
- emit_comment = false;
- printf("\t#");
- }
+ if (p > 0.1) {
+ if (emit_comment) {
+ emit_comment = false;
+ printf("\t#");
+ }
- /*
- * The percentage of coverage leaving at this branch, and
- * its prediction ratio.
- */
- printf(" -%.2f%% / %.2f%%", 100*(double)br->taken / br->coverage,
- 100*(double)br->pred / br->taken);
+ /*
+ * The percentage of coverage leaving at this branch, and
+ * its prediction ratio.
+ */
+ printf(" -%.2f%% (p:%.2f%%)", p, 100*(double)br->pred / br->taken);
+ }
}
}
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-07-08 16:37 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-07-08 13:30 [RFC][PATCH 0/7] perf: Branch stack annotation and fixes Peter Zijlstra
2016-07-08 13:31 ` [RFC][PATCH 1/7] perf/x86/intel: Rework the large PEBS setup code Peter Zijlstra
2016-07-08 16:36 ` Jiri Olsa
2016-07-08 22:00 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-07-08 22:25 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-07-10 9:08 ` Jiri Olsa
2016-07-08 13:31 ` [RFC][PATCH 2/7] perf,x86: Ensure perf_sched_cb_{inc,dec}() is only called from pmu::{add,del}() Peter Zijlstra
2016-07-08 13:31 ` [RFC][PATCH 3/7] perf/x86/intel: DCE intel_pmu_lbr_del() Peter Zijlstra
2016-07-08 13:31 ` [RFC][PATCH 4/7] perf/x86/intel: Remove redundant test from intel_pmu_lbr_add() Peter Zijlstra
2016-07-08 13:31 ` [RFC][PATCH 5/7] perf/x86/intel: Clean up LBR state tracking Peter Zijlstra
2016-07-08 13:31 ` [RFC][PATCH 6/7] perf: Optimize perF_pmu_sched_task() Peter Zijlstra
2016-07-08 13:31 ` [RFC][PATCH 7/7] perf/annotate: Add branch stack / basic block information Peter Zijlstra
2016-07-08 14:55 ` Ingo Molnar
2016-07-08 16:27 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-07-08 16:36 ` Peter Zijlstra [this message]
2016-09-08 16:18 ` Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
2016-09-08 16:41 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-09-08 16:51 ` Peter Zijlstra
2016-09-08 17:07 ` Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
2016-09-08 16:43 ` Stephane Eranian
2016-09-08 16:59 ` Andi Kleen
2016-09-08 17:11 ` Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
2016-09-09 2:40 ` Jin, Yao
2016-09-08 18:15 ` Peter Zijlstra
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=20160708163632.GK30927@twins.programming.kicks-ass.net \
--to=peterz@infradead.org \
--cc=acme@kernel.org \
--cc=alexander.shishkin@linux.intel.com \
--cc=andi@firstfloor.org \
--cc=davidcc@google.com \
--cc=eranian@google.com \
--cc=jolsa@kernel.org \
--cc=kan.liang@intel.com \
--cc=khandual@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=mingo@kernel.org \
--cc=namhyung@kernel.org \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).