<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 12-07-05 10:49 AM, Diego Dompe
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CAEBwSh8vqVr9LsPPRxx_c9da7M3spcMwrHTkSX+bWE1_UQVXbw@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">Hi Mathieu,
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Thanks for the help. Here is my list of details:</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>- Clocks: the spec doesn't explain properly that timestamps
are an offset from the base time of the clock they refer to.
Since I was using 64bit timestamps I somehow assumed that I was
using absolute timestamps from the epoch (although the spec
doesn't says it either).</div>
</blockquote>
This is acceptable AFAIK, just to be clear, you can use arbitrary
time origins, that means epoch is a valid origin too. You can also
use a scaling factor, just be careful applying it since a double has
53 bits and thus you may lose precision.<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CAEBwSh8vqVr9LsPPRxx_c9da7M3spcMwrHTkSX+bWE1_UQVXbw@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<div><br>
</div>
<div>- I saw that the lttng-generated traces for metadata are
always a multiple of 4k in size (at least the ones I generate
for either kernel or user space). I can't find where in the spec
it mentions requirements regarding metadata packet padding. I
was generating metadata packets that ended up right after my
TSDL and eclipse wasn't happy about it (although I didn't try
babeltrace). </div>
</blockquote>
Could you send the trace please, I can look into it. <br>
<br>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CAEBwSh8vqVr9LsPPRxx_c9da7M3spcMwrHTkSX+bWE1_UQVXbw@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<div>Also I found that the lttng-generated traces have a "empty"
metadata packet after the metadata containing the TSDL, I didn't
find either any documentation regarding this.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Regards,</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Diego</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>
<div class="gmail_quote">On Thu, Jul 5, 2012 at 8:20 AM, Mathieu
Desnoyers <span dir="ltr"><<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com"
target="_blank">mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com</a>></span>
wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0
.8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div class="HOEnZb">
<div class="h5">* Diego Dompe (<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:ddompe@gmail.com">ddompe@gmail.com</a>)
wrote:<br>
> Hi,<br>
><br>
> I'm developing a custom tracer for an embedded
product that will generate<br>
> CTF format. I was able to generate generic traces
that can be interpreted<br>
> properly with babeltrace (but not with eclipse, I
already file a bug for<br>
> that), but I found the CTF specification lacking in
some aspects (I had to<br>
> peek into lttng-generated CTF traces to figure out
some details). I was<br>
> wondering what is the proper mailing list to clear
my questions and provide<br>
> feedback on the CTF specification for improvement
in the areas where the<br>
> documentation is not detailed yet. I don't see any
CTF-specific mailing<br>
> list, it's OK to discuss it here? Or maybe directly
with a developer(s)?<br>
<br>
</div>
</div>
Hi Diego,<br>
<br>
Yes, this mailing list would be the proper place, along
maybe with<br>
adding the MCA tiwg mailing list in CC, which I'm doing
here.<br>
<br>
Thanks,<br>
<br>
Mathieu<br>
<span class="HOEnZb"><font color="#888888"><br>
--<br>
Mathieu Desnoyers<br>
Operating System Efficiency R&D Consultant<br>
EfficiOS Inc.<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true" href="http://www.efficios.com"
target="_blank">http://www.efficios.com</a><br>
</font></span></blockquote>
</div>
<br>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>