Re: [PATCH v1] trace-cmd: introduce --initital-delay for record command

2017-12-18 Thread David Hildenbrand
On 18.12.2017 22:43, Steven Rostedt wrote: > On Mon, 18 Dec 2017 21:56:33 +0100 > David Hildenbrand wrote: > >> I'll have a try tomorrow if I I''lose events with 20MB buffers per CPU >> when recording more than 60 seconds (on a very active system with >> mentioned scheduler rtaces being turned o

Re: [PATCH v1] trace-cmd: introduce --initital-delay for record command

2017-12-18 Thread Steven Rostedt
On Mon, 18 Dec 2017 21:56:33 +0100 David Hildenbrand wrote: > I'll have a try tomorrow if I I''lose events with 20MB buffers per CPU > when recording more than 60 seconds (on a very active system with > mentioned scheduler rtaces being turned on). > Another option is to add a '-w' option to rec

Re: [PATCH v1] trace-cmd: introduce --initital-delay for record command

2017-12-18 Thread David Hildenbrand
On 18.12.2017 18:52, Steven Rostedt wrote: > On Mon, 18 Dec 2017 17:23:24 +0100 > David Hildenbrand wrote: > >> What I need: Start tracing and flush all buffers when exiting. (e.g. > > Why don't you use "trace-cmd start" and "trace-cmd extract"? > > "trace-cmd record" is all about not losing ev

Re: [PATCH v1] trace-cmd: introduce --initital-delay for record command

2017-12-18 Thread Steven Rostedt
On Mon, 18 Dec 2017 17:23:24 +0100 David Hildenbrand wrote: > What I need: Start tracing and flush all buffers when exiting. (e.g. Why don't you use "trace-cmd start" and "trace-cmd extract"? "trace-cmd record" is all about not losing events. If you are creating a big buffer, then I think you w

Re: [PATCH v1] trace-cmd: introduce --initital-delay for record command

2017-12-18 Thread David Hildenbrand
On 18.12.2017 16:41, Steven Rostedt wrote: > On Mon, 18 Dec 2017 12:24:12 +0100 > David Hildenbrand wrote: > >> If recording a big number of events to a big buffer, one might want to >> minimize the trace-cmd activity for a certain period in time. >> Especially, don't see any trace-cmd activity f

Re: [PATCH v1] trace-cmd: introduce --initital-delay for record command

2017-12-18 Thread Steven Rostedt
On Mon, 18 Dec 2017 12:24:12 +0100 David Hildenbrand wrote: > If recording a big number of events to a big buffer, one might want to > minimize the trace-cmd activity for a certain period in time. > Especially, don't see any trace-cmd activity for some time. If there are > a lot of events, the lo

[PATCH v1] trace-cmd: introduce --initital-delay for record command

2017-12-18 Thread David Hildenbrand
If recording a big number of events to a big buffer, one might want to minimize the trace-cmd activity for a certain period in time. Especially, don't see any trace-cmd activity for some time. If there are a lot of events, the loop might actually never sleep, resulting in the "-s" option never beco