Re: [PATCH] perf stat: Poll for monitored tasks being alive in fork mode

From: Jiri Olsa
Date: Fri Jan 04 2019 - 07:54:47 EST


On Fri, Jan 04, 2019 at 10:28:17AM +0800, Jin Yao wrote:
> Following test shows the stat keeps running even if no longer
> task to monitor (mgen exits at ~5s).
>
> perf stat -e cycles -p `pgrep mgen` -I1000 -- sleep 10
> time counts unit events
> 1.000148916 1,308,365,864 cycles
> 2.000379171 1,297,269,875 cycles
> 3.000556719 1,297,187,078 cycles
> 4.000914241 761,261,827 cycles
> 5.001306091 <not counted> cycles
> 6.001676881 <not counted> cycles
> 7.002046336 <not counted> cycles
> 8.002405651 <not counted> cycles
> 9.002766625 <not counted> cycles
> 10.001395827 <not counted> cycles
>
> We'd better finish stat immediately if there's no longer task to
> monitor.
>
> After:
>
> perf stat -e cycles -p `pgrep mgen` -I1000 -- sleep 10
> time counts unit events
> 1.000180062 1,236,592,661 cycles
> 2.000421539 1,223,733,572 cycles
> 3.000609910 1,297,047,663 cycles
> 4.000807545 1,297,215,816 cycles
> 5.001001578 1,297,208,032 cycles
> 6.001390345 582,343,659 cycles
> sleep: Terminated
>
> Now the stat exits immediately when the monitored tasks ends.
>
> Signed-off-by: Jin Yao <yao.jin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> tools/perf/builtin-stat.c | 7 +++++++
> 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+)
>
> diff --git a/tools/perf/builtin-stat.c b/tools/perf/builtin-stat.c
> index 63a3afc..71f3bc8 100644
> --- a/tools/perf/builtin-stat.c
> +++ b/tools/perf/builtin-stat.c
> @@ -553,6 +553,13 @@ static int __run_perf_stat(int argc, const char **argv, int run_idx)
>
> if (interval || timeout) {
> while (!waitpid(child_pid, &status, WNOHANG)) {
> + if (!is_target_alive(&target,
> + evsel_list->threads) &&
> + (child_pid != -1)) {

do we need that child_pid check? we just returned from waitpid
so we should be ok.. we just make the race window smaller

could we just do:

if (!is_target_alive(&target, evsel_list->threads)) {
kill(child_pid, SIGTERM);
break;
}

also I'm not sure we should do this only under new option,
as it might break people's scripts.. thoughts?

jirka

> + kill(child_pid, SIGTERM);
> + break;
> + }
> +
> nanosleep(&ts, NULL);
> if (timeout)
> break;
> --
> 2.7.4
>