[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1228310264.9673.238.camel@twins>
Date: Wed, 03 Dec 2008 14:17:44 +0100
From: Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>
To: Frédéric Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>
Cc: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>, Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Tim Bird <tim.bird@...sony.com>,
Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/2] tracing/function-graph-tracer: improve duration
output
On Wed, 2008-12-03 at 14:11 +0100, Frédéric Weisbecker wrote:
> 2008/12/3 Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>:
> > Actually, I was also thinking of keeping the CPU number in front:
> >
> > ------------------------------------------
> > 0) cat-2796 => events/-9
> > ------------------------------------------
> >
> > This way we can easily grep for a common CPU and still get the context
> > switches:
> >
> > grep '^0)' trace > /tmp/trace0
>
> I agree. More easy to grep. Ingo, Peter, others, what do you think?
Everything that aids parsing is good :-)
> > Of course it will probably also work without the '^' now, but then it
> > might grab ftrace_printks with a '0)' if we add those.
>
>
> I proposed a solution for ftrace_printk (which I planned to implement
> this evening).
> Since we are in a C-style output, that would be good to put the ftrace_printk
> as /* C comments */ inside just below the function that called it.
> Like this:
>
> func_that_called_ftrace_printk {
> /* Message from ftrace_printk */
> }
>
> This way we keep the idea of comment which comes along the role of
> ftrace_printk and we know
> which function called it, at which depth.....
>
> Do you like it this way?
Yep
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists