On Thu, 24 Mar 2016 13:16:20 +0800 Peter Xu <peterx@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Hi, Steven, > > On Fri, Mar 04, 2016 at 08:23:11AM -0500, Steven Rostedt wrote: > > My idea for a trace-cmd server, is to have a --client operation, for > > running on the guest. > > > > trace-cmd server --client <connection> > > > > The connection will be some socket, either network or something > > directly attached to the host. > > > > Then on the host, we can have > > > > trace-cmd server --connect <guest> > > > > Where the server will create a connection to the guest. > > > > And then, you could run on the host: > > > > trace-cmd record <host-events> --connect <guest> <guest-events> > > > > And this will start recording host events, and then connect to the > > local server that connects to the guest(s) and that will start tracing > > on the guest as well. > > > > Then events on the guest will be passed to the host server. > > > > Something like this is my idea. We can work out the details on the best > > way to get things working. We may be able to eliminate the host server > > middle man. But I envision that we need a trace-cmd server running on > > the guest to start off the commands. > > Not sure whether fully I understand the above, it seems that we can > remove the host server middle man (as you have mentioned). Moreover, > I am not sure whether we can use this for multiple hosts as well, Honest question, what's the multiple hosts use-case? I would start by thinking about the most simple use-case: a host and a guest with a single vCPU. Then add vCPUs, and then add multiple guests. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kvm" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
