* Xiao Guangrong <xiaoguangrong@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Thanks for your review, Ingo! > > On 03/06/2012 05:07 PM, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > > > So, your new tool has a similar workflow to: > > > > perf kvm record > > perf kvm report > > > > but differs from it in terms of events used and in terms of > > reported output. > > > > To me it appears that your tool is basically pretty similar to > > 'perf stat', adapted to KVM, right? > > > > So, could your new tool's workflow be simplified like this: > > > > perf kvm stat .. > > > > ? > > > > To automatically stat all vcpus in the system, the well-known > > -a/--all-cpus system-wide method could be used: > > > > perf kvm stat -a ... > > > > with stat output following immediately after it has finished. > > > > > Actually, the stat information has already been included in the report. > > > > It should also be possible to use those new events in a > > recording fashion - a new, rather logical command sub-space > > could be used for that: > > > > perf kvm stat record ... > > perf kvm stat report ... > > > > [ This could be expanded to regular 'perf stat' as well: 'perf > > stat record' and 'perf stat report' would be useful - but I > > suspect that's outside the scope of your patches. ] > > > > > I totally agree with you except i prefer 'perf kvm events' to > 'perf kvm stat' :) : it records some specified kvm events and > smartly analyze it. I think it matches its doing better. Well, my problem is that *all* of the 'perf kvm' functionality deals with events :-) So the 'events' does not say much - you just add a variation to the theme without really distinguishing it. Since 'perf stat' is not yet used and the output of your tool looks quite perf stat alike, why not use that name and standardize all these workflows? Thanks, Ingo -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
