On 09/11/2018 11:32 AM, Andrii Anisov wrote: > Hello George, > > > On 11.09.18 13:15, George Dunlap wrote: >>> if mhz: >>> - tsc = tsc / (mhz*1000000.0) >>> + tsc = tsc * 1000.0 / mhz >> Why do you prefer this? > I'm playing with scheduling from one hand, so time stamps in seconds > does not give understanding about what's going on. > From other hand I'm quite confused about how useful timestamps in > seconds could be for traces. As per my understanding, tracer should be > useful for debugging some rapidly changing processes.
Oh, sorry -- I missed the point of this patch. --- xentrace_format: print timestamps in nanoseconds ...rather than seconds. Having timestamps for rapidly-occurring events in nanoseconds makes it easier to understand what's going on. While here, document the -c option. --- What I do in xenalyze is to have the timestamps in seconds, but always print down to the nanosecond. (For this I actually break cpu cycles into s and ns separately, and then print "%u.%09u".) But this is also fine with me. -George _______________________________________________ Xen-devel mailing list Xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel
