[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <20090313122458.43EE.A69D9226@jp.fujitsu.com>
Date: Fri, 13 Mar 2009 12:28:31 +0900 (JST)
From: KOSAKI Motohiro <kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com>
To: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Cc: kosaki.motohiro@...fujitsu.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
Lai Jiangshan <laijs@...fujitsu.com>,
Steven Rostedt <srostedt@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 05/16] tracing: show that buffer size is not expanded
> > > # cat /debug/tracing/buffer_size_kb
> > > 7 (expanded: 1408)
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > I have one question.
> > Why souldn't use following output?
> >
> > sprintf(buf, "%lu\n", trace_buf_size >> 10);
> >
> >
> > My point is:
> > - pure number output can hadle easily.
> > - nobody need to know internal memory saving logic.
>
> My answer to the second point is: "I do" ;-)
>
> I like to know the real buffer size. That '7' comes from the ring buffer
> size directly. If something is going wrong, I do not want to hide the fact
> that the ring buffer size is not what I expect it to be. Lets say someone
> modifies the code, and we miss expanding the buffer. It will be very hard
> to debug why we are getting a small trace. But if we see that the buffer
> has not been expanded, we know exactly what is wrong.
ok. understanding.
please ignore my last mail.
Thanks!
--
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