Aleksandar Markovic <aleksandar.qemu.de...@gmail.com> writes:
> сре, 17. јун 2020. у 17:34 Alex Bennée <alex.ben...@linaro.org> је написао/ла: >> >> >> Eric Blake <ebl...@redhat.com> writes: >> >> > On 6/16/20 6:12 PM, Ahmed Karaman wrote: >> >> Greetings, >> >> >> >> As a part of the TCG Continous Benchmarking project for GSoC this >> >> year, detailed reports discussing different performance measurement >> >> methodologies and analysis results will be sent here on the mailing >> >> list. >> >> >> >> The project's first report is currently being revised and will be >> >> posted on the mailing list in the next few days. >> >> A section in this report will deal with measuring the top 25 executed >> >> functions when running QEMU. It includes two Python scripts that >> >> automatically perform this task. >> >> >> >> This series adds these two scripts to a new performance directory >> >> created under the scripts directory. It also adds a new >> >> "Miscellaneous" section to the end of the MAINTAINERS file with a >> >> "Performance Tools and Tests" subsection. >> >> >> >> Best regards, >> >> Ahmed Karaman >> >> >> >> Ahmed Karaman (3): >> >> MAINTAINERS: Add 'Miscellaneous' section >> >> scripts/performance: Add callgrind_top_25.py script >> >> scripts/performance: Add perf_top_25.py script >> >> >> >> MAINTAINERS | 7 ++ >> >> scripts/performance/callgrind_top_25.py | 95 +++++++++++++++++++++++++ >> >> scripts/performance/perf_top_25.py | 82 +++++++++++++++++++++ >> >> 3 files changed, 184 insertions(+) >> >> create mode 100644 scripts/performance/callgrind_top_25.py >> >> create mode 100644 scripts/performance/perf_top_25.py >> > >> > Are the new scripts supposed to have executable permissions, or are they >> > always invoked as 'python path/to/script.py' where the executable bit is >> > less important? >> >> I would assume +x for directly invocable scripts - certainly we have a >> lot of those in the scripts directory. >> > > There is no reason IMHO for these scripts not having +x and Ahmed > should correct this in v2, and I think that was his original > intention. > > However, I was a little surprized though when I found out this in our > scripts directory: > > $ find . -name \*.py -type f -print | xargs ls -l <snip> > -rw-r--r-- 1 rtrk rtrk 20723 May 10 11:21 ./dump-guest-memory.py > -rw-r--r-- 1 rtrk rtrk 2751 Jun 2 10:22 ./modules/module_block.py > -rw-r--r-- 1 rtrk rtrk 7842 May 10 11:21 ./qapi/commands.py > -rw-r--r-- 1 rtrk rtrk 5673 May 10 11:21 ./qapi/common.py > -rw-r--r-- 1 rtrk rtrk 9742 May 10 11:21 ./qapi/doc.py > -rw-r--r-- 1 rtrk rtrk 1107 May 10 11:21 ./qapi/error.py > -rw-r--r-- 1 rtrk rtrk 6148 May 10 11:21 ./qapi/events.py > -rw-r--r-- 1 rtrk rtrk 12297 May 10 11:21 ./qapi/expr.py > -rw-r--r-- 1 rtrk rtrk 8280 May 10 11:21 ./qapi/gen.py > -rw-r--r-- 1 rtrk rtrk 0 May 10 11:21 ./qapi/__init__.py > -rw-r--r-- 1 rtrk rtrk 8533 May 10 11:21 ./qapi/introspect.py > -rw-r--r-- 1 rtrk rtrk 21696 May 10 11:21 ./qapi/parser.py > -rw-r--r-- 1 rtrk rtrk 41301 May 10 11:21 ./qapi/schema.py > -rw-r--r-- 1 rtrk rtrk 1789 May 10 11:21 ./qapi/source.py > -rw-r--r-- 1 rtrk rtrk 8724 May 10 11:21 ./qapi/types.py > -rw-r--r-- 1 rtrk rtrk 9980 May 10 11:21 ./qapi/visit.py > -rw-r--r-- 1 rtrk rtrk 1843 Jun 2 10:22 ./qemugdb/aio.py > -rw-r--r-- 1 rtrk rtrk 3514 Jun 2 10:22 ./qemugdb/coroutine.py > -rw-r--r-- 1 rtrk rtrk 897 Jun 2 10:22 ./qemugdb/__init__.py > -rw-r--r-- 1 rtrk rtrk 2741 Jun 2 10:22 ./qemugdb/mtree.py > -rw-r--r-- 1 rtrk rtrk 1213 Jun 2 10:22 ./qemu-gdb.py > -rw-r--r-- 1 rtrk rtrk 1469 Jun 2 10:22 ./qemugdb/tcg.py > -rw-r--r-- 1 rtrk rtrk 1850 Jun 2 10:22 ./qemugdb/timers.py > -rw-r--r-- 1 rtrk rtrk 2447 May 10 11:21 ./simplebench/bench-example.py > -rw-r--r-- 1 rtrk rtrk 4615 May 10 11:21 ./simplebench/simplebench.py > -rw-r--r-- 1 rtrk rtrk 1443 May 10 11:21 ./tracetool/backend/dtrace.py > -rw-r--r-- 1 rtrk rtrk 1471 May 10 11:21 ./tracetool/backend/ftrace.py > -rw-r--r-- 1 rtrk rtrk 4098 May 10 11:21 ./tracetool/backend/__init__.py > -rw-r--r-- 1 rtrk rtrk 1499 May 10 11:21 ./tracetool/backend/log.py > -rw-r--r-- 1 rtrk rtrk 3116 May 10 11:21 ./tracetool/backend/simple.py > -rw-r--r-- 1 rtrk rtrk 1175 May 10 11:21 ./tracetool/backend/syslog.py > -rw-r--r-- 1 rtrk rtrk 1190 May 10 11:21 ./tracetool/backend/ust.py > -rw-r--r-- 1 rtrk rtrk 2094 May 10 11:21 ./tracetool/format/c.py > -rw-r--r-- 1 rtrk rtrk 1744 May 10 11:21 ./tracetool/format/d.py > -rw-r--r-- 1 rtrk rtrk 2912 May 10 11:21 ./tracetool/format/h.py > -rw-r--r-- 1 rtrk rtrk 2402 May 10 11:21 ./tracetool/format/__init__.py > -rw-r--r-- 1 rtrk rtrk 3725 May 10 11:21 ./tracetool/format/log_stap.py > -rw-r--r-- 1 rtrk rtrk 2467 May 10 11:21 > ./tracetool/format/simpletrace_stap.py > -rw-r--r-- 1 rtrk rtrk 1653 May 10 11:21 ./tracetool/format/stap.py > -rw-r--r-- 1 rtrk rtrk 2388 May 10 11:21 ./tracetool/format/tcg_helper_c.py > -rw-r--r-- 1 rtrk rtrk 1343 May 10 11:21 ./tracetool/format/tcg_helper_h.py > -rw-r--r-- 1 rtrk rtrk 2145 May 10 11:21 > ./tracetool/format/tcg_helper_wrapper_h.py > -rw-r--r-- 1 rtrk rtrk 2749 May 10 11:21 ./tracetool/format/tcg_h.py > -rw-r--r-- 1 rtrk rtrk 968 May 10 11:21 ./tracetool/format/ust_events_c.py > -rw-r--r-- 1 rtrk rtrk 3678 May 10 11:21 ./tracetool/format/ust_events_h.py > -rw-r--r-- 1 rtrk rtrk 14489 May 10 11:21 ./tracetool/__init__.py > -rw-r--r-- 1 rtrk rtrk 4301 May 10 11:21 ./tracetool/transform.py > -rw-r--r-- 1 rtrk rtrk 2067 May 10 11:21 ./tracetool/vcpu.py So I think these are all modules or loaded indirectly (in the case of the gdb helpers). There was a big clean-up recently removing the #!/bin/env python headers from a chunk of these. <snip> > -rw-r--r-- 1 rtrk rtrk 310 May 10 11:21 ./shaderinclude.pl Arguably this could be +x but it seems to be there for the benefit of the make system which explicitly calls perl anyway. > > Are all these permissions all right? I think so. -- Alex Bennée
