From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755965AbYK0Pv1 (ORCPT ); Thu, 27 Nov 2008 10:51:27 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1754623AbYK0PvL (ORCPT ); Thu, 27 Nov 2008 10:51:11 -0500 Received: from mail-qy0-f11.google.com ([209.85.221.11]:34382 "EHLO mail-qy0-f11.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753282AbYK0PvH (ORCPT ); Thu, 27 Nov 2008 10:51:07 -0500 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version :content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition :references; b=QLn4j43dyqOhrHzQO3CrKzcIOzwYu1RXDhrZcvi6d7/Fx7oCCBOuQdvqZGUqCFI6Y1 fPQBGSD6rb/ES5p1QOyLny71+h7qhvuwP6+Saj9ce1xF+hUEjTWaFphvwpg5XoIELysf /kV+bF7A/mfMVvUpXwZWcBYgmW9JYdwU8ufGU= Message-ID: Date: Thu, 27 Nov 2008 16:51:06 +0100 From: "=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Fr=E9d=E9ric_Weisbecker?=" To: "Steven Rostedt" Subject: Re: [PATCH] tracing/function-branch-tracer: enhancements for the trace output Cc: "Ingo Molnar" , "Tim Bird" , "Linux Kernel" , "Peter Zijlstra" In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <492DEDE9.9010109@gmail.com> <20081127103424.GA9132@elte.hu> <20081127135155.GA23076@elte.hu> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org 2008/11/27 Steven Rostedt : > No, please keep the CPU # first. If anything, you will want to separate > out the CPUs first. Otherwise you will see things all mixed up. So perhaps between CPU and time? I don't really like it after the time, not so easy to find.... > Hmm, I could also add a per cpu files. > > debugfs/tracing/buffers/cpu0 > debugfs/tracing/buffers/cpu1 > debugfs/tracing/buffers/cpu2 > debugfs/tracing/buffers/cpu3 That would be useful indeed, as the ftrace_trace_pid on this tracer. But I wonder about the cost of double function tracing in this case. Your idea of a tgid;pid would be nice (with tgid || pid). > That would print out the trace for a single CPU. > > BTW, I'm really not here. I'm on holiday eating turkeys.