lttng-dev.lists.lttng.org archive mirror
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Mathieu Desnoyers via lttng-dev <lttng-dev@lists.lttng.org>
To: Philippe Proulx <pproulx@efficios.com>
Cc: Diamon discuss <diamon-discuss@lists.linuxfoundation.org>,
	lttng-dev <lttng-dev@lists.lttng.org>,
	Jeremie Galarneau <jgalar@efficios.com>,
	Genevieve Bastien <gbastien+lttng@versatic.net>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH CTF 2/3] Clarify monotonicity requirement on timestamp begin
Date: Tue, 28 Apr 2020 14:54:45 -0400 (EDT)	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <252145848.72946.1588100085527.JavaMail.zimbra@efficios.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1480394831.72907.1588099321783.JavaMail.zimbra@efficios.com>

----- On Apr 28, 2020, at 2:42 PM, Philippe Proulx pproulx@efficios.com wrote:

> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Mathieu Desnoyers" <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com>
>> To: "gbastien+lttng" <gbastien+lttng@versatic.net>, "Matthew Khouzam"
>> <matthew.khouzam@ericsson.com>,
>> diamon-discuss@linuxfoundation.org, pproulx@efficios.com, "Jeremie Galarneau"
>> <jgalar@efficios.com>
>> Cc: "lttng-dev" <lttng-dev@lists.lttng.org>, "Mathieu Desnoyers"
>> <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com>
>> Sent: Thursday, 23 April, 2020 16:52:25
>> Subject: [RFC PATCH CTF 2/3] Clarify monotonicity requirement on timestamp begin
> 
>> Signed-off-by: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com>
>> ---
>> common-trace-format-specification.md | 10 ++++++----
>> 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>> 
>> diff --git a/common-trace-format-specification.md
>> b/common-trace-format-specification.md
>> index f5fea51..53b70f4 100644
>> --- a/common-trace-format-specification.md
>> +++ b/common-trace-format-specification.md
>> @@ -836,10 +836,12 @@ TSDL metadata):
>>     range between these timestamps should include all event timestamps
>>     assigned to events contained within the packet. The timestamp at the
>>     beginning of an event packet is guaranteed to be below or equal the
>> -    timestamp at the end of that event packet. The timestamp at the end
>> -    of an event packet is guaranteed to be below or equal the
>> -    timestamps at the end of any following packet within the same stream.
>> -    See [Clocks](#spec8) for more detail.
>> +    timestamp at the end of that event packet. The timestamp at the
>> +    beginning of an event packet is guaranteed to be above or equal the
> 
> "greater than or equal to"

done

> 
>> +    timestamps at the beginning of any prior packet within the same
>> +    stream. The timestamp at the end of an event packet is guaranteed to
>> +    be below or equal the timestamps at the end of any following packet
> 
> "less than or equal to"

done,

Thanks!

Mathieu

> 
> Phil
> 
>> +    within the same stream. See [Clocks](#spec8) for more detail.
>>   * **Events discarded count**. Snapshot of a per-stream
>>     free-running counter, counting the number of events discarded that
>>     were supposed to be written in the stream after the last event in
>> --
> > 2.11.0

-- 
Mathieu Desnoyers
EfficiOS Inc.
http://www.efficios.com

WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID
From: Mathieu Desnoyers via lttng-dev <lttng-dev@lists.lttng.org>
To: Philippe Proulx <pproulx@efficios.com>
Cc: Diamon discuss <diamon-discuss@lists.linuxfoundation.org>,
	lttng-dev <lttng-dev@lists.lttng.org>,
	Jeremie Galarneau <jgalar@efficios.com>,
	Genevieve Bastien <gbastien+lttng@versatic.net>
Subject: Re: [lttng-dev] [RFC PATCH CTF 2/3] Clarify monotonicity requirement on timestamp begin
Date: Tue, 28 Apr 2020 14:54:45 -0400 (EDT)	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <252145848.72946.1588100085527.JavaMail.zimbra@efficios.com> (raw)
Message-ID: <20200428185445.kQa98SdG8tjzT5C511MXyTgbTQcBj8AGYEw6Kok1cAM@z> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1480394831.72907.1588099321783.JavaMail.zimbra@efficios.com>

----- On Apr 28, 2020, at 2:42 PM, Philippe Proulx pproulx@efficios.com wrote:

> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Mathieu Desnoyers" <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com>
>> To: "gbastien+lttng" <gbastien+lttng@versatic.net>, "Matthew Khouzam"
>> <matthew.khouzam@ericsson.com>,
>> diamon-discuss@linuxfoundation.org, pproulx@efficios.com, "Jeremie Galarneau"
>> <jgalar@efficios.com>
>> Cc: "lttng-dev" <lttng-dev@lists.lttng.org>, "Mathieu Desnoyers"
>> <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com>
>> Sent: Thursday, 23 April, 2020 16:52:25
>> Subject: [RFC PATCH CTF 2/3] Clarify monotonicity requirement on timestamp begin
> 
>> Signed-off-by: Mathieu Desnoyers <mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com>
>> ---
>> common-trace-format-specification.md | 10 ++++++----
>> 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>> 
>> diff --git a/common-trace-format-specification.md
>> b/common-trace-format-specification.md
>> index f5fea51..53b70f4 100644
>> --- a/common-trace-format-specification.md
>> +++ b/common-trace-format-specification.md
>> @@ -836,10 +836,12 @@ TSDL metadata):
>>     range between these timestamps should include all event timestamps
>>     assigned to events contained within the packet. The timestamp at the
>>     beginning of an event packet is guaranteed to be below or equal the
>> -    timestamp at the end of that event packet. The timestamp at the end
>> -    of an event packet is guaranteed to be below or equal the
>> -    timestamps at the end of any following packet within the same stream.
>> -    See [Clocks](#spec8) for more detail.
>> +    timestamp at the end of that event packet. The timestamp at the
>> +    beginning of an event packet is guaranteed to be above or equal the
> 
> "greater than or equal to"

done

> 
>> +    timestamps at the beginning of any prior packet within the same
>> +    stream. The timestamp at the end of an event packet is guaranteed to
>> +    be below or equal the timestamps at the end of any following packet
> 
> "less than or equal to"

done,

Thanks!

Mathieu

> 
> Phil
> 
>> +    within the same stream. See [Clocks](#spec8) for more detail.
>>   * **Events discarded count**. Snapshot of a per-stream
>>     free-running counter, counting the number of events discarded that
>>     were supposed to be written in the stream after the last event in
>> --
> > 2.11.0

-- 
Mathieu Desnoyers
EfficiOS Inc.
http://www.efficios.com
_______________________________________________
lttng-dev mailing list
lttng-dev@lists.lttng.org
https://lists.lttng.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lttng-dev

  parent reply	other threads:[~2020-04-28 18:54 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-04-23 20:52 [RFC PATCH CTF 0/3] Common Trace Format Updates (upcoming 1.8.3) Mathieu Desnoyers via lttng-dev
2020-04-23 20:52 ` [RFC PATCH CTF 1/3] Clarify that unlisted enum values are implementation-defined Mathieu Desnoyers via lttng-dev
2020-04-23 22:51   ` Jérémie Galarneau via lttng-dev
2020-04-24 14:05     ` Mathieu Desnoyers via lttng-dev
2020-04-24 14:05       ` [lttng-dev] " Mathieu Desnoyers via lttng-dev
2020-04-28 18:40   ` Philippe Proulx via lttng-dev
2020-04-28 18:40     ` [lttng-dev] " Philippe Proulx via lttng-dev
2020-04-28 18:51     ` Mathieu Desnoyers via lttng-dev
2020-04-28 18:51       ` [lttng-dev] " Mathieu Desnoyers via lttng-dev
2020-04-29 12:08       ` Mathieu Desnoyers via lttng-dev
2020-04-29 12:08         ` [lttng-dev] " Mathieu Desnoyers via lttng-dev
2020-04-29 16:50         ` Philippe Proulx via lttng-dev
2020-04-29 16:50           ` [lttng-dev] " Philippe Proulx via lttng-dev
2020-04-23 20:52 ` [RFC PATCH CTF 2/3] Clarify monotonicity requirement on timestamp begin Mathieu Desnoyers via lttng-dev
2020-04-28 18:42   ` Philippe Proulx via lttng-dev
2020-04-28 18:42     ` [lttng-dev] " Philippe Proulx via lttng-dev
2020-04-28 18:54     ` Mathieu Desnoyers via lttng-dev [this message]
2020-04-28 18:54       ` Mathieu Desnoyers via lttng-dev
2020-04-23 20:52 ` [RFC PATCH CTF 3/3] Clarify that timestamp begin/end need to be complete clock values Mathieu Desnoyers via lttng-dev

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=252145848.72946.1588100085527.JavaMail.zimbra@efficios.com \
    --to=lttng-dev@lists.lttng.org \
    --cc=diamon-discuss@lists.linuxfoundation.org \
    --cc=gbastien+lttng@versatic.net \
    --cc=jgalar@efficios.com \
    --cc=mathieu.desnoyers@efficios.com \
    --cc=pproulx@efficios.com \
    --subject='Re: [RFC PATCH CTF 2/3] Clarify monotonicity requirement on timestamp begin' \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).