On 14.09.2018 11:28, Jiri Olsa wrote: > On Fri, Sep 14, 2018 at 10:26:53AM +0200, Jiri Olsa wrote: > > SNIP > >>>> The threaded monitoring currently can't monitor backward maps >>>> and there are probably more limitations which I haven't spotted >>>> yet. >>>> >>>> So far I tested on laptop: >>>> http://people.redhat.com/~jolsa/record_threads/test-4CPU.txt >>>> >>>> and a one bigger server: >>>> http://people.redhat.com/~jolsa/record_threads/test-208CPU.txt >>>> >>>> I can see decrease in recorded LOST events, but both the benchmark >>>> and the monitoring must be carefully configured wrt: >>>> - number of events (frequency) >>>> - size of the memory maps >>>> - size of events (callchains) >>>> - final perf.data size >>>> >>>> It's also available in: >>>> git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/jolsa/perf.git >>>> perf/record_threads >>>> >>>> thoughts? ;-) thanks >>>> jirka >>> >>> It is preferable to split into smaller pieces that bring >>> some improvement proved by metrics numbers and ready for >>> merging and upstream. Do we have more metrics than the >>> data loss from trace AIO patches? >> >> well the primary focus is to get more events in, >> so the LOST metric is the main one > > actualy I was hoping, could you please run it through the same > tests as you do for AIO code on some huge server?
Yeah, I will, but it takes some time. > > thanks, > jirka >
