Re: [tracecompass-dev] Thread Priority in KernelStateProvider

["christian mansky" <christian.mansky@xxxxxx>]

Hi Alexandre and Matthew,
thanks for your support. In the meantime I tried to come up with a proper 
implemention in the KernelStateProvider. First tests look promising; however I'd 
like to test it more thoroughly. When those tests are finished, is it OK to 
submit the patches? I suppose the preferred way to do so is via Gerrit as 
described in the "Developer Resources".
Regards,
Chris


>> Gesendet: Montag, 16. Februar 2015 um 19:51 Uhr
>> Von: "Alexandre Montplaisir" <alexmonthy@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> An: christian.mansky@xxxxxx
>> Cc: "tracecompass developer discussions" <tracecompass-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>> Betreff: Re: [tracecompass-dev] Thread Priority in KernelStateProvider
>> On 02/14/2015 03:21 PM, christian mansky wrote:
>> > Hi Alexandre,
>> > I agree, another column isn't such a bright idea with the aligned axis approach. Actually, my first thought was a dedicated view showing current task properties; however, I was thinking about a custom made view and didn't dare propose it. The properties view didn't come to mind, but I like it. How about adding the current taskname, tid and priority to the properties view?
>> 
>> Yep, this shounds like a good plan. I'm not sure how easy it will be to
>> match a PropertySource to an arbitrary interval taken in the view, but
>> I've opened the following bug so that we can look into it:
>> https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=460046
>> 
>> 
>> Cheers,
>> Alexandre

>> A tooltip alone would not be sufficient, but it certainly is a nice addition.
>> Regards Chris
>>
>>> Date: Fri, 13 Feb 2015 14:29:19 -0500
>>> From: Alexandre Montplaisir <alexmonthy@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>> To: christian.mansky@xxxxxx
>>> Cc: tracecompass developer discussions <tracecompass-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>>> Subject: Re: [tracecompass-dev] Thread Priority in KernelStateProvider
>>> Message-ID: <54DE508F.8060108@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
>>>
>>> Hi Chris,
>>>
>>> In fact we're trying to move away from having columns in views like
>>> these, so that we can eventually have a kind of "unified time axis", as
>>> described at [1]. If we want to display extra information for each
>>> entry, we could do so in a dedicated view, for example the Properties view.
>>>
>>> What do you think of adding the priority information to the tooltip,
>>> when the user mouses-over a state in the Control Flow View? Would it be
>>> sufficient?
>>>
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Alexandre
>>>
>>> [1] https://wiki.eclipse.org/Trace_Compass/Design_Documents/Aligned_x_axis[https://wiki.eclipse.org/Trace_Compass/Design_Documents/Aligned_x_axis]
>>>
>>>
>>> On 02/13/2015 02:06 PM, christian mansky wrote:
>>>> Hi Matthew,
>>>> thanks for the reply. To be honest up until now I have not given the data output much thought, but now that you mention it ... I want a quick overview of the current thread when stepping through a kernel trace. Since the Control Flow View already highlights the current thread, what about a new column "Prio" next to the process name or after the ptid column?
>>>> Regards Chris
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> Date: Fri, 13 Feb 2015 10:47:46 -0500
>>>> From: Matthew Khouzam <matthew.khouzam@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>> To: tracecompass developer discussions <tracecompass-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>> Subject: Re: [tracecompass-dev] Thread Priority in KernelStateProvider
>>>> Message-ID: <54DE1CA2.4040109@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"
>>>>
>>>> Looks great as an idea! How do you plan on displaying this? I personally
>>>> encourage writing patches, they are very welcome. I just want to make
>>>> sure before you embark on that journey that you already know how to
>>>> output the data to the user.
>>>> If you have any questions, don't hesitate to ask.
>>>> BR
>>>> Matthew
>>>> On 15-02-13 04:15 AM, Mansky Christian wrote:
>>>>> Hi everyone,
>>>>> I'm new to Trace Compass and I looked into your great tool for some
>>>>> time now. I'd like to propose a change (or an enhancement) to the
>>>>> KernelStateProvider
>>>>> (org.eclipse.tracecompass.analysis.os.linux.core.kernelanalysis). I
>>>>> miss the current priority of a thread. In case of a sched_switch event
>>>>> the next_prio field contains the current thread priority. Of course
>>>>> the sched_pi_setprio event (only applied from a thread on itself) and
>>>>> a change of priority from the usermode (most likely a syscall, and
>>>>> again applied on itself) must also be taken into account.
>>>>> In your opinion, is this a worthy enhancemet? If so, I'll look into it
>>>>> a bit deeper trying to provide a patch?
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks in advance and best regards,
>>>>> Chris
>>>