On Mon, 22 Mar 2021 11:59:35 +0200
"Tzvetomir Stoyanov (VMware)" <tz.stoyanov@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> @@ -4168,7 +4167,8 @@ static void write_guest_file(struct buffer_instance *instance)
> handle = tracecmd_get_output_handle_fd(fd);
> if (!handle)
> die("error writing to %s", file);
> -
> + if (instance->flags & BUFFER_FL_TSC2NSEC)
> + tracecmd_set_out_clock(handle, TSCNSEC_CLOCK);
> temp_files = malloc(sizeof(*temp_files) * cpu_count);
> if (!temp_files)
> die("failed to allocate temp_files for %d cpus",
> @@ -4290,9 +4290,10 @@ static void record_data(struct common_record_context *ctx)
> add_guest_info(handle, instance);
> }
>
> - if (ctx->tsc2nsec.mult)
> + if (ctx->tsc2nsec.mult) {
> add_tsc2nsec(handle, &ctx->tsc2nsec);
> -
> + tracecmd_set_out_clock(handle, TSCNSEC_CLOCK);
> + }
> if (tracecmd_write_cmdlines(handle))
> die("Writing cmdlines");
>
OK, I see why you wanted to clean up the writing of all clocks. But I
still find that information valuable as for the reasons I stated in the
other email. I wonder if we can still read all the clocks, parse them
out (remove the '[' and ']') and have tracecmd_set_out_clock() still
write them. Hmm? Or at least save them in a new option (like I save
uname).
-- Steve
|