On Thu, 2016-09-29 at 18:28 +0100, George Dunlap wrote:
> On 29/09/16 18:23, Dario Faggioli wrote:
> > In that case, knowing where a certain vcpu that we're asking to
> > burn
> > its credit is running, may mean going quite a bit up in the trace,
> > to
> > find its last context switch/runstate change, which is not always
> > the
> > easiest thing to do.
> > 
> > It indeed can be scripted, but when _looking_ at a trace, trying to
> > figure out why you're observing this or that weird behavior, I
> > think
> > knowing v->processor is a useful information.
> 
> But if you're using xenalyze, xenalyze will know where the vcpu is
> running / was last run; couldn't you have xenalyze report that
> information when dumping the burn_credits record?
> 
Yes, this is indeed a possibility.

Xenalyze is not doing anything like or similar to that for now (at
least, not in dump mode), that's probably why it did not occur to me
that this could be done.

But yeah, we've already discussed that it can become more intelligent
and do more complex things and more refined reports, and this can well
fit into that.

> Again, I'm just pushing back to make sure the additional trace volume
> is
> actually necessary. :-)
> 
Sure, that's fine! Ok, let's drop this patch for now then. :-)

Regards,
Dario
-- 
<<This happens because I choose it to happen!>> (Raistlin Majere)
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Dario Faggioli, Ph.D, http://about.me/dario.faggioli
Senior Software Engineer, Citrix Systems R&D Ltd., Cambridge (UK)