On Mon, Dec 23, 2013 at 09:44:25AM -0500, David Ahern wrote: > On 12/23/13, 8:10 AM, Frederic Weisbecker wrote: > >On Fri, Dec 20, 2013 at 10:09:53AM -0700, David Ahern wrote: > >>On 12/20/13, 5:27 AM, Joseph Schuchart wrote: > >>>I know this comes late, but: As far as I can see, your change does not > >>>preserve the logic of the code I suggested. The idea was to first gather > >>>all the maximum timestamps of all cpus (that is, the last timestamp seen > >>>on each cpu) and then determine the minimum of these maxima. These are > >>>two distinct steps that I think cannot be combined in one update. Your > >> > >> A number of people have reported similar problems -- timestamps > >>below last flush time. This approach would solve that problem for > >>data processed from files, so it would be a good improvement. > > > >Could it be near what you're looking for? > > > >https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/2/18/53 > > > > Forgot about that patch. It is similar to what Joseph wants for > analyzing a file. > > I was carrying that patch while working on perf-kvm-stat-live last > Fall. It does not solve the problem for live commands, so ended up > dropping it and going with local (to the command) hacks. I still > think for live commands getting a perf_clock timestamp at the start > of a round and using that as the flush time will work best.
Ok, but how would you fetch this perf clock timestamp, with an explicit read? In the meantime, I can fix and post my old patch, which should solve at least the perf.data based event stream. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
