From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.2 required=3.0 tests=HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS, MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,USER_AGENT_SANE_2 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5AB7FC3F2D9 for ; Mon, 2 Mar 2020 16:43:38 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3CEB32173E for ; Mon, 2 Mar 2020 16:43:38 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727183AbgCBQnh (ORCPT ); Mon, 2 Mar 2020 11:43:37 -0500 Received: from mail.kernel.org ([198.145.29.99]:48820 "EHLO mail.kernel.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1727359AbgCBQnh (ORCPT ); Mon, 2 Mar 2020 11:43:37 -0500 Received: from gandalf.local.home (cpe-66-24-58-225.stny.res.rr.com [66.24.58.225]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 360B12173E; Mon, 2 Mar 2020 16:43:37 +0000 (UTC) Date: Mon, 2 Mar 2020 11:43:35 -0500 From: Steven Rostedt To: "Tzvetomir Stoyanov (VMware)" Cc: linux-trace-devel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH v21 11/13] trace-cmd: Basic infrastructure for host - guest timestamp synchronization Message-ID: <20200302114335.364b10e1@gandalf.local.home> In-Reply-To: <20200302101404.150035-12-tz.stoyanov@gmail.com> References: <20200302101404.150035-1-tz.stoyanov@gmail.com> <20200302101404.150035-12-tz.stoyanov@gmail.com> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.17.3 (GTK+ 2.24.32; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-trace-devel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-trace-devel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, 2 Mar 2020 12:14:02 +0200 "Tzvetomir Stoyanov (VMware)" wrote: > @@ -940,7 +1215,11 @@ static int make_trace_resp(struct tracecmd_msg *msg, int page_size, int nr_cpus, > write_uints(msg->buf, data_size, ports, nr_cpus); > > msg->hdr.size = htonl(ntohl(msg->hdr.size) + data_size); > - msg->trace_resp.flags = use_fifos ? htonl(MSG_TRACE_USE_FIFOS) : htonl(0); > + msg->trace_req.flags = use_fifos ? MSG_TRACE_USE_FIFOS : 0; Is there a reason to use "msg->trace_req" instead of "msg->trace_resp"? -- Steve > + msg->trace_resp.flags = htonl(msg->trace_resp.flags); > + msg->trace_resp.tsync_proto = htonl(tsync_proto); > + msg->trace_resp.tsync_port = htonl(tsync_port); > + > msg->trace_resp.cpus = htonl(nr_cpus); > msg->trace_resp.page_size = htonl(page_size); > msg->trace_resp.trace_id = htonll(trace_id);