Oh. I think I misunderstood the option usage. I orginally used "blkparse -i trace.blkparse.* -d bp.bin". However it handled number of cpu times, instead of one. "blkparse -i trace.blkparse.0" and "blkparse -i trace.blkparse.1" have the same results. While for btt, I orginally used "btt -i trace.blkparse.*". However the result was only to handle trace.blkparse.0, instead of others. So the two results were not match. Now I will stick to the standard workflow. Thanks for your help. On Tue, Mar 2, 2010 at 3:20 AM, Alan D. Brunelle <Alan.Brunelle@xxxxxx> wrote: > On Mon, 2010-03-01 at 19:26 +0800, Xuekun Hu wrote: >> Hi, Guys >> >> >From the doc, the standard work-flow for btt is to handle the binary >> output from "blkparse -d". I found btt can also directly handle the >> raw trace file generated by blktrace. However I found the two results >> are not match. > > 'btt' is intended only to be run w/ the output from blkparse -d : the > fact that "it kind of works" with straight blktrace output only means > that the results will be "kind of right". :-) > > Regards, > Alan > > -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrace" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
