On Wed, Nov 23, 2016 at 04:44:44AM -0500, [email protected] wrote: > From: Kan Liang <[email protected]> > > Caculate the total NMI overhead on each CPU, and display them in perf > report > > Signed-off-by: Kan Liang <[email protected]> > --- > tools/perf/builtin-report.c | 11 +++++++++++ > tools/perf/util/event.h | 4 ++++ > tools/perf/util/machine.c | 9 +++++++++ > tools/perf/util/session.c | 18 ++++++++++++++++++ > 4 files changed, 42 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/tools/perf/builtin-report.c b/tools/perf/builtin-report.c > index 1416c39..b1437586 100644 > --- a/tools/perf/builtin-report.c > +++ b/tools/perf/builtin-report.c > @@ -365,11 +365,22 @@ static int perf_evlist__tty_browse_hists(struct > perf_evlist *evlist, > struct report *rep, > const char *help) > { > + struct perf_session *session = rep->session; > struct perf_evsel *pos; > + int cpu; > > fprintf(stdout, "#\n# Total Lost Samples: %" PRIu64 "\n#\n", > evlist->stats.total_lost_samples); > if (symbol_conf.show_overhead) { > fprintf(stdout, "# Overhead:\n"); > + for (cpu = 0; cpu < session->header.env.nr_cpus_online; cpu++) { > + if (!evlist->stats.total_nmi_overhead[cpu][0]) > + continue; > + if (rep->cpu_list && !test_bit(cpu, rep->cpu_bitmap)) > + continue; > + fprintf(stdout, "#\tCPU %d: NMI#: %" PRIu64 " time: %" > PRIu64 " ns\n", > + cpu, evlist->stats.total_nmi_overhead[cpu][0], > + evlist->stats.total_nmi_overhead[cpu][1]); > + } > fprintf(stdout, "#\n"); > } > evlist__for_each_entry(evlist, pos) { > diff --git a/tools/perf/util/event.h b/tools/perf/util/event.h > index d1b179b..7d40d54 100644 > --- a/tools/perf/util/event.h > +++ b/tools/perf/util/event.h > @@ -262,6 +262,9 @@ enum auxtrace_error_type { > * multipling nr_events[PERF_EVENT_SAMPLE] by a frequency isn't possible to > get > * the total number of low level events, it is necessary to to sum all struct > * sample_event.period and stash the result in total_period. > + * > + * The total_nmi_overhead tells exactly the NMI handler overhead on each CPU. > + * The total NMI# is stored in [0], while the accumulated time is in [1]. > */
hum, why can't this be stored this in the struct instead.. ? thanks, jirka
