From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Frederic Weisbecker Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2011 16:21:08 +0000 Subject: Re: [PATCH] tracing, perf : add cpu hotplug trace events Message-Id: <20110117162105.GA1778@nowhere> List-Id: References: <20110107151200.GB1736@nowhere> <20110114183516.GB1926@nowhere> In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: Vincent Guittot Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-hotplug@vger.kernel.org, Steven Rostedt , Ingo Molnar , Rusty Russell , Amit Kucheria On Mon, Jan 17, 2011 at 07:49:58AM -0600, Vincent Guittot wrote: > I was just wondering which tracepoints format between my 1st proposal > and yours was the easier to post process by an application like > pytimechart. No idea as pytimechart uses his own ad hoc event parsing. Either way there won't be much differences though. > I have updated the cpu hotplug tracepoint according to your remarks > and steve's ones. I have just replaced the second > cpu_arch_die_start/end in your proposal by cpu_arch_dead_start/endfrq Tracepoints tend to describe actions rather than states, although I can show you some exceptions as well. But this tends to be the major tendency. I suggest you to be stay consistent with this scheme. Thanks.