Re: [PATCH 00/12] perf lock: New subcommand "perf lock", for analyzinglock statistics

[Hitoshi Mitake]

(2010å01æ29æ 23:34), Jens Axboe wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 22 2010, Hitoshi Mitake wrote:
>    
> > Adding new subcommand "perf lock" to perf.
> >
> > I made this patch series on
> > latest perf/core of tip (ef12a141306c90336a3a10d40213ecd98624d274),
> > so please apply this series to perf/core.
> >      
> [snip]
>
> I wanted to give this a go today, since I think it's pretty nifty and a
> lot better than using /proc/lock_stat. But it basically spirals the
> system into death [1]. How big a system did you test this on?
>
> [1] Got this: [  117.097918] hrtimer: interrupt took 35093901 ns
>
>    

I tested this on Core i7 965 + 3GB DRAM machine.
Test program is mainly "perf bench sched messaging".

Could you tell me the detail of your test situation?

Thanks,
Hitoshi

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/