[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20101213174959.GE1691@nowhere>
Date: Mon, 13 Dec 2010 18:50:06 +0100
From: Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>
To: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...stprotocols.net>,
"David S. Ahern" <daahern@...co.com>,
linux-perf-users@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] perf tools: Add reference timestamp to perf header
On Mon, Dec 13, 2010 at 06:37:40PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Mon, 2010-12-13 at 18:23 +0100, Frederic Weisbecker wrote:
> > On Mon, Dec 13, 2010 at 06:13:39PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > > On Mon, 2010-12-13 at 18:11 +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Preferably, yes, but I don't see why we can't break the data file format
> > > > if we've got good reasons to.
> > >
> > > I mean, we pretty much _have_ to break data file format when we want to
> > > do splice() support.
> >
> > Because we'll have one file per-cpu?
>
> Right.
>
> > But perf.data on UP will be sensibly the same as today so I suspect
> > we won't need to be compatible.
>
> Nope, since one file simply doesn't scale, data-streams will have to
> live outside of the main file.
>
> And when you have to make that happen, there is no reason to maintain
> any kind of compatibility. The only thing you could do is provide some
> script to convert old data files to the new format.
Right, a script should do the trick.
--
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