[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20170103194204.GB8826@krava>
Date: Tue, 3 Jan 2017 20:42:04 +0100
From: Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...hat.com>
To: David Ahern <dsahern@...il.com>
Cc: Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <arnaldo.melo@...il.com>,
Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...nel.org>,
Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>,
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@...llo.nl>,
Wang Nan <wangnan0@...wei.com>,
lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 6/7] perf record: Add switch-output size option argument
On Tue, Jan 03, 2017 at 09:23:18AM -0700, David Ahern wrote:
> On 1/3/17 9:12 AM, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote:
> > Em Tue, Jan 03, 2017 at 08:33:35AM -0700, David Ahern escreveu:
> >> On 1/3/17 1:19 AM, Jiri Olsa wrote:
> >>> It's now possible to specify the threshold size for
> >>> perf.data like:
> >>>
> >>> $ perf record --switch-output=2G ...
> >>>
> >>> Once it's reached, the current data are dumped in to the
> >>> perf.data.<timestamp> file and session does on.
> >>
> >> How about something like max-file-size instead of switch-output?
> >
> > Well, I think he wants to use the "switch-output" semantic, which will
> > go on "slicing" the output into multiple files according to the
> > specified criteria, be it the existing signal one or a file size.
yea, I wanted to keep current option.. which I think
we will have to keep in any case
> >
> > "max-file-size" looks like a hard limit, no hint about producing
> > multiple files.
>
> Sure, my point is that switch-output is an odd name for the option.
>
> file-slice?
I actually don't mind the current switch-output=signal/size/time,
because we change/switch the output file on various conditions:
signal/size/time ;-)
jirka
Powered by blists - more mailing lists