Re: [PATCH v2 1/8] xenalyze: add to tools/xentrace/xenalyze

[George Dunlap <george.dunlap@eu.citrix.com>]

On 05/12/2015 09:45 AM, Ian Campbell wrote:
> On Mon, 2015-05-11 at 15:33 +0100, George Dunlap wrote:
>> On 05/11/2015 03:23 PM, Ian Campbell wrote:
>>> On Mon, 2015-05-11 at 16:15 +0200, Olaf Hering wrote:
>>>> On Thu, May 07, George Dunlap wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Thu, May 7, 2015 at 11:35 AM, Olaf Hering <olaf@aepfle.de> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>>  tools/xentrace/xenalyze/Makefile   |    21 +
>>>>
>>>>> I personally think it would make more sense to just put the xenalyze
>>>>> directory in tools/.
>>>
>>> What (if anything) is the relationship between xentrace and xenalyze?
>>>
>>> I think the latter post processes the result of the former, is that
>>> right?
>>
>> Yes.  So someone might argue that, both having to do with the xen
>> tracing system, they should live in the same directory; that's where
>> xentrace_format lives, after all.
>>
>> However, all xentrace does is basically map the hypervisor buffers and
>> dump them to disk.  Other than that, there is no functional overlap
>> between them.
>>
>> It looks like olaf is only checking in the core xenalyze binary, not the
>> other side bits (like the html documentation), so keeping them in the
>> same directory might make sense.
> 
> You mean to put xenalyze directly into xentrace (i.e. merging it with
> the current contents)?

I was speaking of putting xenalyze into the xentrace directory.  That
directory already has xentrace, xentrace_setsize, xenctx, and
xentrace_format.  I'd prefer it be in its own directory
(tools/xenalyze), but either way works for me.

(I suspect xentrace_setsize probably *should* be merged in with xentrace
as a command-line option; and xenctx should be rationalized with the
other version of it -- hvmctx or something?)

 -George