Quoting Tvrtko Ursulin (2018-02-15 09:44:58) > > On 14/02/2018 19:20, Chris Wilson wrote: > > Quoting Tvrtko Ursulin (2018-02-14 18:50:30) > >> From: Tvrtko Ursulin <tvrtko.ursu...@intel.com> > >> > >> Another re-post of my earlier, now slightly updated work, to expose a DRM > >> client > >> hierarchy in sysfs in order to enable a top like tool: > > > > So what I don't like about it is that it is a new interface in sysfs. We > > already have a PMU interface for statistics and would rather see that > > extended than abandoned. If perf can handle new processes coming and > > going, surely we can handle new clients? :| > > I don't think it means abandoning the PMU, just that I don't see it > suitable for this use case. > > Even if we go with adding a PMU task mode, that is a separate thing from > this. It would allow profiling of a single task, but not enumerating and > profiling all clients/tasks from perf/PMU.
I think perf top seems to handle processes coming and going, so I don't think it's a fundamental limitation of perf, just our understanding :) I'd rather have one interface to maintain :) -Chris _______________________________________________ Intel-gfx mailing list Intel-gfx@lists.freedesktop.org https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/intel-gfx
