On Thu, May 07, 2020 at 10:43:43PM -0700, Ian Rogers wrote: > On Thu, May 7, 2020 at 2:47 PM Andi Kleen <ak@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > > - without this change events within a metric may get scheduled > > > > together, after they may appear as part of a larger group and be > > > > multiplexed at different times, lowering accuracy - however, less > > > > multiplexing may compensate for this. Does mutiplexing somewhat related events at different times actually reduce accuracy, or is it just more likely to give that appearance? It seems that perf measurements are only useful if the workload is in a fairly steady state. If there is some wobbling, then measuring at the same time is more accurate for the periods where the events are being measured simultaneously, but may be far off for when they are not being measured at all. Spreading them out over a longer duration may actually increase accuracy by sampling over more varied intervals. Or, is the concern more about trying to time-slice the results in a fairly granular way and expecting accurate results then? (Or, maybe my ignorance is showing again. :-) PC
