Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 15 of 15

Thread: Intergrating profiling of Mesa into PTS using OProfiler

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    522

    Default

    I think Josť Fonseca (vmware/apitrace) has been doing some Mesa profiling ( http://jrfonseca.googlecode.com/svn/...llium.oprofile ).

    I've used his apitrace tool to do some very basic profiling to compare r600g with Catalyst (SwapBuffers taking 6-8 times longer with Mesa in my tests). Maybe it might be worth to identify the slow calls this way.

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    261

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by log0 View Post
    I think Josť Fonseca (vmware/apitrace) has been doing some Mesa profiling ( http://jrfonseca.googlecode.com/svn/...llium.oprofile ).

    I've used his apitrace tool to do some very basic profiling to compare r600g with Catalyst (SwapBuffers taking 6-8 times longer with Mesa in my tests). Maybe it might be worth to identify the slow calls this way.
    Thanks I'll take a look at this too. Josť Fonseca's gprof2dot tool looks nice too it creates a good picture of whats going on and should give me a good example for processing the oprofile output.

  3. #13

    Default

    tarceri:

    Overall, the patch is looking good, one thing to point out though is that the pts_client shell_exec is called more often than just during the test execution, so the pts_module_manager::module_process('__post_test_ex ecution'); call would be inappropriate universally. That pts_client function is also called when installing tests and in a few other conditions too. Aside from that on the quick review the other code looks fine.

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    261

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Michael View Post
    tarceri:

    Overall, the patch is looking good, one thing to point out though is that the pts_client shell_exec is called more often than just during the test execution, so the pts_module_manager::module_process('__post_test_ex ecution'); call would be inappropriate universally. That pts_client function is also called when installing tests and in a few other conditions too. Aside from that on the quick review the other code looks fine.
    Yeah looks there are quite a few things I still need to work out. Anyway what ever happened to "Karsk" if you dont mind me asking?

  5. #15

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by tarceri View Post
    Yeah looks there are quite a few things I still need to work out. Anyway what ever happened to "Karsk" if you dont mind me asking?
    Karsk was for some enterprise research and ended up working out okay but my lack of time prevented me from polishing it up and pursuing a version for public usage.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •