[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAP4=nvTCVLa5MzBbJVz=S_ZiDoJ2hY-8fM+uRnGgumi0sFivWA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 4 Mar 2025 09:16:11 +0100
From: Tomas Glozar <tglozar@...hat.com>
To: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Cc: Costa Shulyupin <costa.shul@...hat.com>, John Kacur <jkacur@...hat.com>,
"Luis Claudio R. Goncalves" <lgoncalv@...hat.com>, Eder Zulian <ezulian@...hat.com>,
Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter@...aro.org>, linux-trace-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v1] rtla: Save trace when option `--trace` is specified
Ășt 4. 3. 2025 v 9:00 odesĂlatel Tomas Glozar <tglozar@...hat.com> napsal:
>
> So we need to stop tracing here, before we save the trace, if we want
> to do that. Perhaps combining this with the cleanup patch [1] and
> doing the stopping in save_trace_to_file would make sense?
>
Also, the patch will also save the trace if running with -a and the
threshold was not violated, which is not what one usually wants, e.g.:
$ rtla osnoise top -c 0 -q -a 10000000 -d 5s
Operating System Noise
duration: 0 00:00:05 | time is in us
CPU Period Runtime Noise % CPU Aval Max Noise Max
Single HW NMI IRQ Softirq Threa
d
0 #4 4000000 37712 99.05720 10998
555 7624 0 4011 34 2
4
Saving trace to osnoise_trace.txt
I believe it would be better to add a new option, something like
--force-trace, that would be used to save the trace even if there is
no threshold violation. -t/--trace and -a could then be used with the
same semantics as before.
Tomas
Powered by blists - more mailing lists