Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 16 May 2012 19:48:25 +0200 | From | Jiri Olsa <> | Subject | Re: Perf record format portability |
| |
On Wed, May 16, 2012 at 12:58:23PM -0400, Steven Rostedt wrote: > On Wed, 2012-05-16 at 11:59 -0300, Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo wrote: > > > Steve, > > > > Was the kernel trace events infrastructure designed with that in > > mind? I.e. cross analysis? I must be missing something here, still > > ENOCOFFEE :-\ > > Yes, the libparsevents library was design for this from day one. That's > why trace-cmd data file can be run on an ARM and read on x86, or PPC, or > whatever. I did all my development testing against 32bit, 64bit and big > and little endian. This was the case from the beginning.
for ppc64(record) vs x86_64(report) I got following report on latest tip:
[jolsa@dhcp-26-214 test]$ ../perf report > report.target Endianness of raw data not corrected! Warning: 718 samples with id not present in the header Warning: The perf.data file has no samples!
for following record: perf record -a -e sched:sched_switch -e sched:sched_process_exit -e sched:sched_process_fork -e sched:sched_wakeup -- sleep 10 [ perf record: Woken up 1 times to write data ] [ perf record: Captured and wrote 0.178 MB perf.data (~7781 samples) ]
I haven't tried trace-cmd, but I guess let's wait for libparsevents perf integration then.. ;)
jirka
| |