Jiri,
On Thu, Feb 12, 2015 at 8:42 AM, Jiri Olsa wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 11, 2015 at 12:42:41AM +0100, Stephane Eranian wrote:
>
> SNIP
>
>> To use the new feature:
>> - install the posix clock driver
>> - make sure you chmod 644 /dev/trace_clock
>> - compile perf
>> - cd tools/perf/jvmti;
On Wed, Feb 11, 2015 at 12:42:41AM +0100, Stephane Eranian wrote:
SNIP
> To use the new feature:
> - install the posix clock driver
> - make sure you chmod 644 /dev/trace_clock
> - compile perf
> - cd tools/perf/jvmti; make; install wherever is appropriate
>
> Example using openJDK:
>
On Wed, Feb 11, 2015 at 12:42:41AM +0100, Stephane Eranian wrote:
SNIP
To use the new feature:
- install the posix clock driver
- make sure you chmod 644 /dev/trace_clock
- compile perf
- cd tools/perf/jvmti; make; install wherever is appropriate
Example using openJDK:
$
Jiri,
On Thu, Feb 12, 2015 at 8:42 AM, Jiri Olsa jo...@redhat.com wrote:
On Wed, Feb 11, 2015 at 12:42:41AM +0100, Stephane Eranian wrote:
SNIP
To use the new feature:
- install the posix clock driver
- make sure you chmod 644 /dev/trace_clock
- compile perf
- cd
On 2/11/15 9:15 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
On Wed, Feb 11, 2015 at 08:18:37AM -0500, Stephane Eranian wrote:
But, we need a portable solution, there are jitted environment on other
architectures.
Yeah, I'm aware of that. But the time people are not liking any of those
patches.
The thing that
On Wed, Feb 11, 2015 at 08:18:37AM -0500, Stephane Eranian wrote:
> But, we need a portable solution, there are jitted environment on other
> architectures.
Yeah, I'm aware of that. But the time people are not liking any of those
patches.
The thing that seems to have most traction is something
Peter,
On Wed, Feb 11, 2015 at 6:39 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 11, 2015 at 12:42:41AM +0100, Stephane Eranian wrote:
>> To enable synchronization of the runtime MMAPs with those recorded by
>> the kernel on behalf of the perf tool, the runtime needs to timestamp
>> any record in the
On Wed, Feb 11, 2015 at 12:42:41AM +0100, Stephane Eranian wrote:
> To enable synchronization of the runtime MMAPs with those recorded by
> the kernel on behalf of the perf tool, the runtime needs to timestamp
> any record in the dump file using the same time source. The current
> patch series is
On Wed, Feb 11, 2015 at 08:18:37AM -0500, Stephane Eranian wrote:
But, we need a portable solution, there are jitted environment on other
architectures.
Yeah, I'm aware of that. But the time people are not liking any of those
patches.
The thing that seems to have most traction is something
On 2/11/15 9:15 AM, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
On Wed, Feb 11, 2015 at 08:18:37AM -0500, Stephane Eranian wrote:
But, we need a portable solution, there are jitted environment on other
architectures.
Yeah, I'm aware of that. But the time people are not liking any of those
patches.
The thing that
On Wed, Feb 11, 2015 at 12:42:41AM +0100, Stephane Eranian wrote:
To enable synchronization of the runtime MMAPs with those recorded by
the kernel on behalf of the perf tool, the runtime needs to timestamp
any record in the dump file using the same time source. The current
patch series is
Peter,
On Wed, Feb 11, 2015 at 6:39 AM, Peter Zijlstra pet...@infradead.org wrote:
On Wed, Feb 11, 2015 at 12:42:41AM +0100, Stephane Eranian wrote:
To enable synchronization of the runtime MMAPs with those recorded by
the kernel on behalf of the perf tool, the runtime needs to timestamp
any
This patch series extends perf record/report/annotate to enable
profiling of jitted (just-in-time compiled) code. The current
perf tool provides very limited support for profiling jitted
code for some runtime environments. But the support is experimental
and cannot be used in complex environments.
This patch series extends perf record/report/annotate to enable
profiling of jitted (just-in-time compiled) code. The current
perf tool provides very limited support for profiling jitted
code for some runtime environments. But the support is experimental
and cannot be used in complex environments.
14 matches
Mail list logo
