On Tue, 2007-01-02 at 09:18 +0100, Jens Axboe wrote: > On Sat, Dec 30 2006, Ming Zhang wrote: > > On Thu, 2006-12-21 at 10:49 -0500, Ming Zhang wrote: > > > > <snip> > > > > > > > > > > That's fine with me, I'm not suggesting an elaborate scheme. I just want > > > > to prevent people accidentally doin foo.blktrace.0 from missing events > > > > from CPUs 1...N. So: > > > > > > > > * - for stdin > > > > > > > > * 'x' is a fifo, open that. > > > > > > > > * foo and foo.blktrace.[0...N] exists, open foo.blktrace.[0...N] > > > > > > > > Up until now, that is no change from what blkparse currently does, I'm > > > > just describing it. So the new rule I'm proposing is: > > > > > > > > * foo.blktrace.0 given, and foo.blktrace.[1...N] exists, print a warning > > > > and add those files. > > > > > > > > If someone really wants to use only that file (obscure case, I cannot > > > > imagine a real world scenario where that is the case. The weird HT > > > > experimentation case that Seelam gave is easy - just delete the damn > > > > file, it wont even be valid anymore since the first file is > > > > overwritten), then they can use '-' as input and cat the file. > > > > > > > > > > no warning is given. add silently for 4th. > > > > any comment about this patch? > > It looks good, just did not have a chance to test it yet. Will do so and > integrate, thanks!
Thanks. I switched email account recently so I thought I might missed something. One issue is the name. name_check sounds like to do check only while it does change the name value if need. this might not help the code readers. if you can come a better name, i would appreciate it. Ming -- http://blackmagic02881.wordpress.com/ - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-btrace" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
