Messages in this thread | | | From | Baolin Wang <> | Date | Wed, 21 Sep 2016 18:58:14 +0800 | Subject | Re: [PATCH 2/2] time: alarmtimer: Add the trcepoints for alarmtimer |
| |
On 21 September 2016 at 15:26, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> wrote: > On Wed, 21 Sep 2016, Baolin Wang wrote: >> On 21 September 2016 at 06:27, Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> wrote: >> >> + TP_fast_assign( >> >> + __entry->second = rtc_time->tm_sec; >> >> + __entry->minute = rtc_time->tm_min; >> >> + __entry->hour = rtc_time->tm_hour; >> >> + __entry->day = rtc_time->tm_mday; >> >> + __entry->mon = rtc_time->tm_mon; >> >> + __entry->year = rtc_time->tm_year; >> >> + __entry->alarm_type = flag; >> > >> > What's the value of storing the alarm time in RTC format? >> >> As suggested by Steven, change the type of RTC value to save trace buffer. > > A single u64 does not take more storage space than this and it's a single > store.
OK.
> >> > 2) You store the expiry time again in RTC format. Store the information in >> > a plain u64 and be done with it. >> >> But I still think the RTC format is more readable for debugging alarm timer. > > That's what post processing is for. > >> > What's the point of this conditional? Avoiding rtc_ktime_to_tm() ? Oh well... >> > >> >> + tm_set = rtc_ktime_to_tm(now); >> >> + trace_alarmtimer_suspend(&tm_set, type); >> > >> > "now" is CLOCK_REALTIME based. You store the type of the alarm timer which >> > is the first to expire and therefor is the one setting the RTC value, but >> > we don't know which timer it is. Useful - NOT! >> >> We can know the timer by comparing the expire time. > > Please make it similar to the timer/hrtimer tracing so people can reuse > their postprocessing scripts with minimial tweaks.
OK. Thanks.
-- Baolin.wang Best Regards
| |