On Wed, Jan 18, 2012 at 9:48 AM, Harsh Bora <ha...@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote: > On 01/11/2012 11:35 PM, Lluís Vilanova wrote: >> >> This would otherwise break event numbering when actually using the >> "disable" >> property. >> > > IIUC, event numbering does include disabled events too, are you proposing > not to include disabled events in event numbering ? That will affect > interpreting event numbers while reading trace logs also.
I agree with Lluís. Here's how it worked in scripts/tracetool: disabled events were processed with "nop" backend and therefore did not increment the event counter in the "simple" backend. Stefan
