---------------------------------------------------------------------- Message: 1 Date: Mon, 5 Aug 2013 14:24:34 +0200 From: "=?utf-8?Q?David_Lindstr=C3=B6m?=" <[email protected]>
I?m looking for documentation on the old/legacy LTTng trace formats. Before LTTng 2.x and CTF that is. I found a PDF titled "LTTng Trace Binary Format v2.3 Guidelines" which details the 2.3 format nicely. However, I need to support the later versions as well which I'm unable to find anything at all about. What changed between 2.3 and 2.6? Does such documentation even exists? If not, what would be my best options to figure it out? Mvh David Lindström ------------------------------ I had to deal with this when I wrote a RapidMiner plugin that could read LTTng Trace Format 2.6 traces. The format does not even have a name or designation, so I started calling it LTF (LTTng Trace Format). Here is the schedule of "LTTng 1" (a.k.a. LTTng 0.x) trace proprietary formats (indicating lower bounds): LTF 0.4 LTTV 0.6.9 LTTng 0.4.4 LTF 0.5 0.7.0 0.4.5 LTF 0.6 0.8.0 0.5.0 LTF 0.7 0.8.6 0.5.7 LTF 0.8 0.8.80 0.6.78 LTF 1.0 0.10.0-pre1 0.10.0-pre5 LTF 2.0 0.11.0 0.38 LTF 2.1 0.11.1 0.39 LTF 2.2 0.11.4 0.47 LTF 2.3 0.12.0 0.65 LTF 2.4 0.12.21 0.171 LTF 2.5 0.12.22 0.173 LTF 2.6 0.12.30 0.191 LTF id. 0.12.38 0.249 (last versions) For instance, LTF 2.1 was used starting with LTTng 0.39, and was replaced by LTF 2.2 with LTTng 0.47. As you've seen, the pre-2.3 documentation is fragmentary and very poor, the *only* true documentation being Philippe Proulx (2009), "LTTng Trace Binary Format v2.3 Guidelines". One key difference between formats 2.3 and 2.5 is in the block header, where the lost_size field (indicating how many bytes of padding are at the block's end) became its complement, used_size (indicating how many bytes of the block are useful). I have not yet identified any differences of consequence between LTF 2.5 and 2.6. If you have samples of traces in specific legacy formats (pre-2.3 in particular), I'd love to run my LTFReader on them and see if anything pops. Daniel U. Thibault Protection des systèmes et contremesures (PSC) | Systems Protection & Countermeasures (SPC) Cyber sécurité pour les missions essentielles (CME) | Mission Critical Cyber Security (MCCS) R & D pour la défense Canada - Valcartier (RDDC Valcartier) | Defence R&D Canada - Valcartier (DRDC Valcartier) 2459 route de la Bravoure Québec QC G3J 1X5 CANADA Vox : (418) 844-4000 x4245 Fax : (418) 844-4538 NAC : 918V QSDJ <http://www.travelgis.com/map.asp?addr=918V%20QSDJ> Gouvernement du Canada | Government of Canada <http://www.valcartier.drdc-rddc.gc.ca/> _______________________________________________ lttng-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.lttng.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lttng-dev
