Hi Alvaro,
Thanks for the response.
I have filed the following bugs with the logs attached:
https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=311738
https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=311742
For your swapper process not showing up, look at the constructor
for LttngProcessState. The first constructor is not assigning the
traceId. When I made that change, the swapper process started showing up.
Thanks,
n Rick
From:
linuxtools-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:linuxtools-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On
Behalf Of alvaro sanchez
Sent: Tuesday, May 04, 2010 4:42 PM
To: Linux Tools developer discussions
Subject: Re: [linuxtools-dev] eclipse lttng viewer vs. lttv-gui
Hello,
The file format should not be an issue for the representation of the states, I
have tried a couple of files in 2.3 format and detected some differences but
far less than with your file.
I.e. in one of the files I tried with 380 processes,
the only UNNAMED process was the swapper while lttv was able to resolve the
name.
There were 2 out of 380 processes with a birth time of 0.
We will look into these differences and align with lttv,
There
is no specific bug to track the differences as mentioned in your e-mail below,
Please
file a bug so we can track the progress on it.
In
order to have a common ground to discuss it, please submit the traces. If they
are very large please e-mail me directly so I can fetch the logs.
Best
Regards
/Alvaro
On Mon, May 3, 2010 at 4:13 PM, Vestal Richard-B15972 <B15972@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Hi,
I
recognize that the lttng viewer for eclipse is at the .5 state, but here are
some questions that relate to its current functionality. Please let me
know if I can find this information out somewhere else (bug database?):
We
are loading the same trace file into the eclipse viewer as we are into the LTTV
viewer and are seeing differences between them. For instance:
-
The time values (both birth and nanos) are 0 for many entries (>90%)
in eclipse but they almost all have values in the lttv viewer (The swapper
process has 0 values in LTTV).
-
The number of events is different across the two. There are many
UNNAMED processes in the Eclipse viewer.
We
are running on 2.3 traces. Would this be an issue with the trace format?
Thanks,
n
Rick
_______________________________________________
linuxtools-dev mailing list
linuxtools-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/linuxtools-dev