* Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Sun, 2012-01-29 at 17:32 +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > * Andrew Steets <asteets@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > On 1/28/12 6:01 AM, Ingo Molnar wrote: > > > > > > >> prctl(PR_TASK_PERF_EVENTS_DISABLE) doesn't appear to > > > >> disable perf event counters. Here is a demonstration > > > >> program: > > > > > > > > btw., what's your usecase? > > > > > > I'm trying to profile a small section of a long-running > > > program. I ran into trouble using call-graph recording > > > and I thought this might be an alternative way of getting > > > what I was after. > > > > That usecase indeed makes sense. Peter, could we allow this > > for privileged tasks, depending on the perf_paranoia > > settings or such? > > I really dislike it. The sane way around this would be to > allow easy self-profiling instead of doing things arse about > face like that. So, what workflow are you suggesting to Andrew? I guess we are also hurting from the lack of dwarf stack backtrace decoding - that would allow the filtering by parent function without modifying the code. I think Frederic had a prototype working for 32-bit - any update on that? Andrew could work that problem around right now by adding: -fno-omit-frame-pointer to the build of the utility - that should activate -g and perf-report's --parent filter should also work fine. Thanks, Ingo -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-perf-users" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html