On Tue, Feb 11, 2014 at 8:14 AM, Peter Zijlstra <pet...@infradead.org> wrote: > On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 11:21:53PM +0100, Stephane Eranian wrote: >> On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 10:29 PM, Peter Zijlstra <pet...@infradead.org> >> wrote: >> > On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 12:28:55PM -0500, Don Zickus wrote: >> >> The data output is verbose and there are lots of data tables that >> >> interprit the latencies >> >> and data addresses in different ways to help see where bottlenecks might >> >> be lying. >> > >> > Would be good to see what the output looks like. >> > >> > What I haven't seen; and what I would find most useful; is using the IP >> > + dwarf info to map it back to a data structure member. >> > >> > Since you're already using the PEBS data-source fields, you can also >> > have a precise IP. For many cases its possible to reconstruct the exact >> > data member the instruction is modifying. >> > >> The tool already uses precise=2 to get the precise IP. >> >> To get from IP to data member, you'd need some debug info which is not >> yet emitted >> by the compiler. > > That blows; how much is missing?
They need to annotate load and stores. I asked for that feature a while ago. It will come. -- 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/
