Re: [PATCH 2/2] tracing/function-graph-tracer: improve duration output

[Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl>]

On Wed, 2008-12-03 at 14:11 +0100, Frédéric Weisbecker wrote:
> 2008/12/3 Steven Rostedt <rostedt@goodmis.org>:
> > Actually, I was also thinking of keeping the CPU number in front:
> >
> >  ------------------------------------------
> >  0)    cat-2796    =>   events/-9
> >  ------------------------------------------
> >
> > This way we can easily grep for a common CPU and still get the context
> > switches:
> >
> > grep '^0)' trace > /tmp/trace0
> 
> I agree. More easy to grep. Ingo, Peter, others, what do you think?

Everything that aids parsing is good :-)

> > Of course it will probably also work without the '^' now, but then it
> > might grab ftrace_printks with a '0)' if we add those.
> 
> 
> I proposed a solution for ftrace_printk (which I planned to implement
> this evening).
> Since we are in a C-style output, that would be good  to put the ftrace_printk
> as /* C comments */ inside just below the function that called it.
> Like this:
> 
> func_that_called_ftrace_printk {
>     /* Message from ftrace_printk */
> }
> 
> This way we keep the idea of comment which comes along the role of
> ftrace_printk and we know
> which function called it, at which depth.....
> 
> Do you like it this way?

Yep