On Wed, Sep 26, 2012 at 11:30 AM, Steven Rostedt <rost...@goodmis.org> wrote:
> On Tue, 2012-09-25 at 15:29 -0700, David Sharp wrote:
>
>> static int
>> -lat_print_timestamp(struct trace_seq *s, u64 abs_usecs,
>> - unsigned long rel_usecs)
>> +lat_print_timestamp(struct trace_iterator *iter, u64 next_ts)
>> {
>> - return trace_seq_printf(s, " %4lldus%c: ", abs_usecs,
>> - rel_usecs > preempt_mark_thresh ? '!' :
>> - rel_usecs > 1 ? '+' : ' ');
>> + unsigned long verbose = trace_flags & TRACE_ITER_VERBOSE;
>> + unsigned long in_ns = iter->iter_flags & TRACE_FILE_TIME_IN_NS;
>> + unsigned long long abs_ts = iter->ts - iter->tr->time_start;
>> + unsigned long long rel_ts = next_ts - iter->ts;
>> + struct trace_seq *s = &iter->seq;
>> + unsigned long mark_thresh;
>> + int ret;
>> +
>> + if (in_ns) {
>> + abs_ts = ns2usecs(abs_ts);
>> + rel_ts = ns2usecs(rel_ts);
>> + mark_thresh = preempt_mark_thresh_us;
>> + } else
>> + mark_thresh = preempt_mark_thresh_cycles;
>> +
>> + if (verbose && in_ns) {
>> + unsigned long abs_msec = abs_ts;
>> + unsigned long abs_usec = do_div(abs_msec, USEC_PER_MSEC);
>> + unsigned long rel_msec = rel_ts;
>> + unsigned long rel_usec = do_div(rel_msec, USEC_PER_MSEC);
>> +
>> + ret = trace_seq_printf(
>> + s, "[%08llx] %ld.%03ldms (+%ld.%03ldms): ",
>> + ns2usecs(iter->ts),
>> + abs_msec, abs_usec,
>> + rel_msec, rel_usec);
>> + } else if (verbose && !in_ns) {
>> + ret = trace_seq_printf(
>> + s, "[%016llx] %lld (+%lld): ",
>> + iter->ts, abs_ts, rel_ts);
>> + } else { /* !verbose */
>> + ret = trace_seq_printf(
>> + s, " %4lld%s%c: ",
>> + abs_ts,
>> + in_ns ? "us" : "",
>> + rel_ts > mark_thresh ? '!' :
>> + rel_ts > 1 ? '+' : ' ');
>
> I still think the annotations are meaningless for counters. Even if the
> counter is a timer like the tsc, as it does not coincide with real time
> (us), I say just don't print it for counters.
Sounds fine to me, as that's the easiest modification anyway. Done.
>
> This is not helpful:
>
> <snip>
Agreed. The other way to fix it would have been to change the "+"
threshold from 1 to ~2000.
>
>
>> + }
>> + return ret;
>> }
>>
>> int trace_print_context(struct trace_iterator *iter)
>> {
>> struct trace_seq *s = &iter->seq;
>> struct trace_entry *entry = iter->ent;
>> - unsigned long long t = ns2usecs(iter->ts);
>> - unsigned long usec_rem = do_div(t, USEC_PER_SEC);
>> - unsigned long secs = (unsigned long)t;
>> + unsigned long long t;
>> + unsigned long secs, usec_rem;
>> char comm[TASK_COMM_LEN];
>> int ret;
>>
>> @@ -644,8 +680,13 @@ int trace_print_context(struct trace_iterator *iter)
>> return 0;
>> }
>>
>> - return trace_seq_printf(s, " %5lu.%06lu: ",
>> - secs, usec_rem);
>> + if (iter->iter_flags & TRACE_FILE_TIME_IN_NS) {
>> + t = ns2usecs(iter->ts);
>> + usec_rem = do_div(t, USEC_PER_SEC);
>> + secs = (unsigned long)t;
>> + return trace_seq_printf(s, "%5lu.%06lu: ", secs, usec_rem);
>
> You took away the space before %5.
>
>> + } else
>> + return trace_seq_printf(s, "%12llu: ", iter->ts);
>
> here too.
Don't know why I would have changed that... Fixed.
>> }
>>
>> int trace_print_lat_context(struct trace_iterator *iter)
>> @@ -659,36 +700,29 @@ int trace_print_lat_context(struct trace_iterator
>> *iter)
>> *next_entry = trace_find_next_entry(iter, NULL,
>> &next_ts);
>> unsigned long verbose = (trace_flags & TRACE_ITER_VERBOSE);
>> - unsigned long abs_usecs = ns2usecs(iter->ts - iter->tr->time_start);
>> - unsigned long rel_usecs;
>>
>> /* Restore the original ent_size */
>> iter->ent_size = ent_size;
>>
>> if (!next_entry)
>> next_ts = iter->ts;
>> - rel_usecs = ns2usecs(next_ts - iter->ts);
>
>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
