[Melbourne-pm] NYTProf
Dan Tyrrell
dan at jumbuk.com
Tue Feb 10 04:02:24 PST 2009
Hi,
Further to the recent talk (in part) on NYTProf by PauI I noticed that
for certain workloads NYTProf can add significant overheads. See
below. (Note that the process being profiled appeared to be CPU/Memory
bound.) It is not all bad. I have no idea how this overhead would
compare compare to other profiling options - except that the overhead
was much lower than attempting to find interesting (i.e. slow or
poorly written) parts of the code manually. In this case NYTProf made
it quite clear what part of the code was 'interesting'....it rocks!
[dan at localhost checkpatch]$ time perl ./checkpatch.pl --no-tree -q
--file aten2011.c
real 0m8.964s
user 0m8.814s
sys 0m0.025s
[dan at localhost checkpatch]$ time perl -d:NYTProf ./checkpatch.pl
--no-tree --file aten2011.c
real 2m2.884s
user 2m1.549s
sys 0m0.303s
The discussion that prompted this is here:
http://marc.info/?l=linux-kernel&m=123342823128520&w=2
If anyone is interested I can also post the HTML reports somewhere.
Cheers,
Dan Tyrrell
More information about the Melbourne-pm
mailing list