Em Tue, Oct 29, 2013 at 10:20:33AM +0100, Frederic Weisbecker escreveu:
> On Mon, Oct 28, 2013 at 02:48:43PM -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
> > Em Mon, Oct 28, 2013 at 02:01:11PM -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo escreveu:
> > > Em Mon, Oct 28, 2013 at 05:05:30PM +0100, Frederic Weisbecker es
On Mon, Oct 28, 2013 at 02:48:43PM -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
> Em Mon, Oct 28, 2013 at 02:01:11PM -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo escreveu:
> > Em Mon, Oct 28, 2013 at 05:05:30PM +0100, Frederic Weisbecker escreveu:
> > >
> > > Also it differentiate between pre-exec and post-fork even
Em Mon, Oct 28, 2013 at 02:01:11PM -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo escreveu:
> Em Mon, Oct 28, 2013 at 05:05:30PM +0100, Frederic Weisbecker escreveu:
> >
> > Also it differentiate between pre-exec and post-fork events, which looks
> > more precise (and it fixes some comm mangling as well):
> >
>
Em Mon, Oct 28, 2013 at 05:05:30PM +0100, Frederic Weisbecker escreveu:
> On Mon, Oct 28, 2013 at 11:29:12AM -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
> > Em Mon, Oct 28, 2013 at 09:43:09AM -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo escreveu:
> > > Em Mon, Oct 28, 2013 at 11:12:50AM +0100, Frederic Weisbecker es
On Mon, Oct 28, 2013 at 11:29:12AM -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
> Em Mon, Oct 28, 2013 at 09:43:09AM -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo escreveu:
> > Em Mon, Oct 28, 2013 at 11:12:50AM +0100, Frederic Weisbecker escreveu:
> > > On Mon, Oct 28, 2013 at 06:15:26PM +0900, Namhyung Kim wrote:
>
Em Mon, Oct 28, 2013 at 09:43:09AM -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo escreveu:
> Em Mon, Oct 28, 2013 at 11:12:50AM +0100, Frederic Weisbecker escreveu:
> > On Mon, Oct 28, 2013 at 06:15:26PM +0900, Namhyung Kim wrote:
> > > On Mon, 28 Oct 2013 10:09:46 +0100, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> > > > Ah co
Em Mon, Oct 28, 2013 at 11:12:50AM +0100, Frederic Weisbecker escreveu:
> On Mon, Oct 28, 2013 at 06:15:26PM +0900, Namhyung Kim wrote:
> > Hi Frederic,
> >
> > On Mon, 28 Oct 2013 10:09:46 +0100, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> > > Ah cool! Could you please remind me the name of that branch so that
On Mon, Oct 28, 2013 at 06:15:26PM +0900, Namhyung Kim wrote:
> Hi Frederic,
>
> On Mon, 28 Oct 2013 10:09:46 +0100, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> > Ah cool! Could you please remind me the name of that branch so that I
> > can do some tests and work on top of it?
>
> git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm
Hi Frederic,
On Mon, 28 Oct 2013 10:09:46 +0100, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> Ah cool! Could you please remind me the name of that branch so that I
> can do some tests and work on top of it?
git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/namhyung/linux-perf.git
perf/callchain-v5
Thanks,
Nam
2013/10/28 Namhyung Kim :
> Hi David,
>
> On Fri, 25 Oct 2013 12:19:07 -0600, David Ahern wrote:
>> On 10/25/13 12:12 PM, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
>>> Oh I see. It's possible that my massive conversion to use the comm
>>> accessor got blind at some point and left over a few things. I
>>> remember
Hi David,
On Fri, 25 Oct 2013 12:19:07 -0600, David Ahern wrote:
> On 10/25/13 12:12 PM, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
>> Oh I see. It's possible that my massive conversion to use the comm
>> accessor got blind at some point and left over a few things. I
>> remember that I only lightly tested that ne
Em Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 07:12:36PM +0100, Frederic Weisbecker escreveu:
> Oh I see. It's possible that my massive conversion to use the comm
> accessor got blind at some point and left over a few things. I
> remember that I only lightly tested that new comm infrastructure. I
> mean I tested a lot o
On 10/25/13 12:12 PM, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
Oh I see. It's possible that my massive conversion to use the comm
accessor got blind at some point and left over a few things. I
remember that I only lightly tested that new comm infrastructure. I
mean I tested a lot of "perf report -s foo,bar" co
2013/10/25 David Ahern :
> On 10/25/13 7:04 AM, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
>>
>> Em Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 11:56:31AM +0100, Frederic Weisbecker escreveu:
>>>
>>> 2013/10/11 Namhyung Kim :
From: Frederic Weisbecker
>>
>>
This new comm infrastructure provides two features:
>>
>>
>
On 10/25/13 7:04 AM, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
Em Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 11:56:31AM +0100, Frederic Weisbecker escreveu:
2013/10/11 Namhyung Kim :
From: Frederic Weisbecker
This new comm infrastructure provides two features:
I was wondering about the fate of these patches. I can rese
Em Fri, Oct 25, 2013 at 11:56:31AM +0100, Frederic Weisbecker escreveu:
> 2013/10/11 Namhyung Kim :
> > From: Frederic Weisbecker
> > This new comm infrastructure provides two features:
> I was wondering about the fate of these patches. I can resend these or
> do any rebase if you need to.
So I
2013/10/11 Namhyung Kim :
> From: Frederic Weisbecker
>
> This new comm infrastructure provides two features:
>
> 1) It keeps track of all comms lifecycle for a given thread. This
> way we can associate a timeframe to any thread comm, as long as
> PERF_SAMPLE_TIME samples are joined to comm and fo
From: Frederic Weisbecker
This new comm infrastructure provides two features:
1) It keeps track of all comms lifecycle for a given thread. This
way we can associate a timeframe to any thread comm, as long as
PERF_SAMPLE_TIME samples are joined to comm and fork events.
As a result we should have
From: Frederic Weisbecker
This new comm infrastructure provides two features:
1) It keeps track of all comms lifecycle for a given thread. This
way we can associate a timeframe to any thread comm, as long as
PERF_SAMPLE_TIME samples are joined to comm and fork events.
As a result we should have
19 matches
Mail list logo
