Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.kernel > #1324253
| From | Mathieu Poirier <mathieu.poirier@linaro.org> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | linux.kernel |
| Subject | Re: [PATCH V8 23/23] perf tools: adding coresight etm PMU record capabilities |
| Date | 2016-02-02 17:30 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <qXM02-5FW-21@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink) |
| References | (3 earlier) <qUWIh-1vA-15@gated-at.bofh.it> <qWeD8-1qJ-21@gated-at.bofh.it> <qWlbB-6xj-39@gated-at.bofh.it> <qWoCv-F7-29@gated-at.bofh.it> <qWpIe-1q3-15@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| Organization | linux.* mail to news gateway |
[...] >>> > >>> > Looks OK, apart from adding linux/coresight-pmu.h to the manifest, but I >>> > mentioned that on another patch. >>> > >>> > However there is no decoder, which begs the question, is there anything you >>> > can actually do with the perf.data file? Might be a bit confusing for users >>> > if they can capture traces but not use perf tools on the resulting perf.data >>> > file? >>> >>> We are working on a decoding library in parallel to this work. >> >> Would be nice to be able to get both in the same patch kit, no? So that >> one can both record and process the traces, verifying it all works. > > We are still a few weeks away from being in a position where the > community can start playing with the decoding library. I can hold off > on the "perf tools" patches when I queue the kernel side of the work > for 4.6 but since you and Adrian have already reviewed the work it > would be nice to have that part included as well. > > We've been playing with the perf.data files for a couple of months now > and things look at the right place. This isn't surprising since we > are using the same framework as X86. > > I think the generation of the perf.data file should be coupled with > the submission of the kernel driver but would also respect a diverging > point of view. Simply let me know what you prefer and I will adjust > V9 accordingly. Arnaldo, I'm preparing V9 at this time - what's your view on the above? Thanks, Mathieu
Back to linux.kernel | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Re: [PATCH V8 23/23] perf tools: adding coresight etm PMU record capabilities Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@intel.com> - 2016-01-29 11:40 +0100
Re: [PATCH V8 23/23] perf tools: adding coresight etm PMU record capabilities Mathieu Poirier <mathieu.poirier@linaro.org> - 2016-01-29 18:40 +0100
Re: [PATCH V8 23/23] perf tools: adding coresight etm PMU record capabilities Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@kernel.org> - 2016-01-29 22:20 +0100
Re: [PATCH V8 23/23] perf tools: adding coresight etm PMU record capabilities Mathieu Poirier <mathieu.poirier@linaro.org> - 2016-01-29 23:30 +0100
Re: [PATCH V8 23/23] perf tools: adding coresight etm PMU record capabilities Mathieu Poirier <mathieu.poirier@linaro.org> - 2016-02-02 17:30 +0100
Re: [PATCH V8 23/23] perf tools: adding coresight etm PMU record capabilities Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@kernel.org> - 2016-02-02 17:50 +0100
Re: [PATCH V8 23/23] perf tools: adding coresight etm PMU record capabilities Mathieu Poirier <mathieu.poirier@linaro.org> - 2016-02-03 17:20 +0100
csiph-web