Re: [PATCH] tracing/function-branch-tracer: enhancements for the trace output

From: Frédéric Weisbecker
Date: Thu Nov 27 2008 - 10:51:27 EST


2008/11/27 Steven Rostedt <rostedt@xxxxxxxxxxx>:
> No, please keep the CPU # first. If anything, you will want to separate
> out the CPUs first. Otherwise you will see things all mixed up.


So perhaps between CPU and time?
I don't really like it after the time, not so easy to find....

> Hmm, I could also add a per cpu files.
>
> debugfs/tracing/buffers/cpu0
> debugfs/tracing/buffers/cpu1
> debugfs/tracing/buffers/cpu2
> debugfs/tracing/buffers/cpu3


That would be useful indeed, as the ftrace_trace_pid on this tracer.
But I wonder about the cost of double function tracing in this case.
Your idea of a tgid;pid would be nice (with tgid || pid).


> That would print out the trace for a single CPU.
>
> BTW, I'm really not here. I'm on holiday eating turkeys.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/