Alexander Shishkin <alexander.shish...@linux.intel.com>; Namhyung Kim
<namhy...@kernel.org>; Liang, Kan <kan.li...@intel.com>; Anshuman Khandual
<khand...@linux.vnet.ibm.com>; Jin, Yao <yao@intel.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 7/7] perf/annotate: Add branch stack / bas
ar ; LKML
; Jiri Olsa ; Linus Torvalds
; David Carrillo-Cisneros ;
Alexander Shishkin ; Namhyung Kim
; Liang, Kan ; Anshuman Khandual
; Jin, Yao
Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH 7/7] perf/annotate: Add branch stack / basic block
information
Em Thu, Sep 08, 2016 at 09:59:15AM -0700, Andi Kleen escreveu
On Thu, Sep 08, 2016 at 09:43:53AM -0700, Stephane Eranian wrote:
> I like the idea and yes, branch stack can be used for this, but I have
> a hard time understanding the colored output.
> What is the explanation for the color changes?
In general, or the changes acme made? I can only answer the
On Thu, Sep 08, 2016 at 09:43:53AM -0700, Stephane Eranian wrote:
> I like the idea and yes, branch stack can be used for this, but I have
> a hard time understanding the colored output.
> What is the explanation for the color changes?
In general, or the changes acme made? I can only answer the
Em Thu, Sep 08, 2016 at 09:59:15AM -0700, Andi Kleen escreveu:
> On Thu, Sep 08, 2016 at 09:43:53AM -0700, Stephane Eranian wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > On Thu, Sep 8, 2016 at 9:18 AM, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > Em Fri, Jul 08, 2016 at 06:36:32PM +0200, Peter
Em Thu, Sep 08, 2016 at 09:59:15AM -0700, Andi Kleen escreveu:
> On Thu, Sep 08, 2016 at 09:43:53AM -0700, Stephane Eranian wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > On Thu, Sep 8, 2016 at 9:18 AM, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > Em Fri, Jul 08, 2016 at 06:36:32PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra escreveu:
>
Em Thu, Sep 08, 2016 at 06:51:41PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra escreveu:
> On Thu, Sep 08, 2016 at 06:41:35PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > > Please let me know if I should go ahead and push with the combined
> > > patch, that is now at:
> > >
> > >
Em Thu, Sep 08, 2016 at 06:51:41PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra escreveu:
> On Thu, Sep 08, 2016 at 06:41:35PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > > Please let me know if I should go ahead and push with the combined
> > > patch, that is now at:
> > >
> > >
On Thu, Sep 08, 2016 at 09:43:53AM -0700, Stephane Eranian wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Thu, Sep 8, 2016 at 9:18 AM, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
> wrote:
> >
> > Em Fri, Jul 08, 2016 at 06:36:32PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra escreveu:
> > > On Fri, Jul 08, 2016 at 06:27:33PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra
On Thu, Sep 08, 2016 at 09:43:53AM -0700, Stephane Eranian wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Thu, Sep 8, 2016 at 9:18 AM, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
> wrote:
> >
> > Em Fri, Jul 08, 2016 at 06:36:32PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra escreveu:
> > > On Fri, Jul 08, 2016 at 06:27:33PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > >
> >
On Thu, Sep 08, 2016 at 06:41:35PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > Please let me know if I should go ahead and push with the combined
> > patch, that is now at:
> >
> >
On Thu, Sep 08, 2016 at 06:41:35PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > Please let me know if I should go ahead and push with the combined
> > patch, that is now at:
> >
> >
Hi,
On Thu, Sep 8, 2016 at 9:18 AM, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
wrote:
>
> Em Fri, Jul 08, 2016 at 06:36:32PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra escreveu:
> > On Fri, Jul 08, 2016 at 06:27:33PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> >
> > > I've been thinking of filtering all targets and branches that
Hi,
On Thu, Sep 8, 2016 at 9:18 AM, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo
wrote:
>
> Em Fri, Jul 08, 2016 at 06:36:32PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra escreveu:
> > On Fri, Jul 08, 2016 at 06:27:33PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> >
> > > I've been thinking of filtering all targets and branches that are
> > > smaller
On Thu, Sep 08, 2016 at 01:18:57PM -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
> Em Fri, Jul 08, 2016 at 06:36:32PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra escreveu:
> > On Fri, Jul 08, 2016 at 06:27:33PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> >
> > > I've been thinking of filtering all targets and branches that are
> > >
On Thu, Sep 08, 2016 at 01:18:57PM -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
> Em Fri, Jul 08, 2016 at 06:36:32PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra escreveu:
> > On Fri, Jul 08, 2016 at 06:27:33PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> >
> > > I've been thinking of filtering all targets and branches that are
> > >
Em Fri, Jul 08, 2016 at 06:36:32PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra escreveu:
> On Fri, Jul 08, 2016 at 06:27:33PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>
> > I've been thinking of filtering all targets and branches that are
> > smaller than 0.1% in order to avoid this, but so far I've just been
> > ignoring these
Em Fri, Jul 08, 2016 at 06:36:32PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra escreveu:
> On Fri, Jul 08, 2016 at 06:27:33PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>
> > I've been thinking of filtering all targets and branches that are
> > smaller than 0.1% in order to avoid this, but so far I've just been
> > ignoring these
On Fri, Jul 08, 2016 at 06:27:33PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> I've been thinking of filtering all targets and branches that are
> smaller than 0.1% in order to avoid this, but so far I've just been
> ignoring these things.
Like so... seems to 'work'.
---
tools/perf/util/annotate.c | 45
On Fri, Jul 08, 2016 at 06:27:33PM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> I've been thinking of filtering all targets and branches that are
> smaller than 0.1% in order to avoid this, but so far I've just been
> ignoring these things.
Like so... seems to 'work'.
---
tools/perf/util/annotate.c | 45
On Fri, Jul 08, 2016 at 04:55:55PM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> * Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>
> > $ perf record --branch-filter u,any -e cycles:p ./branches 27
> > $ perf annotate branches
>
> Btw., I'd really like to use this feature all the time, so could we please
>
On Fri, Jul 08, 2016 at 04:55:55PM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
>
> * Peter Zijlstra wrote:
>
> > $ perf record --branch-filter u,any -e cycles:p ./branches 27
> > $ perf annotate branches
>
> Btw., I'd really like to use this feature all the time, so could we please
> simplify this somewhat via
* Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> $ perf record --branch-filter u,any -e cycles:p ./branches 27
> $ perf annotate branches
Btw., I'd really like to use this feature all the time, so could we please
simplify this somewhat via a subcommand, via something like:
perf record
* Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> $ perf record --branch-filter u,any -e cycles:p ./branches 27
> $ perf annotate branches
Btw., I'd really like to use this feature all the time, so could we please
simplify this somewhat via a subcommand, via something like:
perf record branches ./branches 27
or
24 matches
Mail list logo