From: Bean Huo <huobean@gmail.com>
To: Avri Altman <Avri.Altman@wdc.com>,
"alim.akhtar@samsung.com" <alim.akhtar@samsung.com>,
"asutoshd@codeaurora.org" <asutoshd@codeaurora.org>,
"jejb@linux.ibm.com" <jejb@linux.ibm.com>,
"martin.petersen@oracle.com" <martin.petersen@oracle.com>,
"stanley.chu@mediatek.com" <stanley.chu@mediatek.com>,
"beanhuo@micron.com" <beanhuo@micron.com>,
"bvanassche@acm.org" <bvanassche@acm.org>,
"tomas.winkler@intel.com" <tomas.winkler@intel.com>,
"cang@codeaurora.org" <cang@codeaurora.org>,
"rostedt@goodmis.org" <rostedt@goodmis.org>,
"joe@perches.com" <joe@perches.com>
Cc: "linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org" <linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 0/6] Several changes for the UPIU trace
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 2020 23:37:30 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <01a4472065034527d57b0866750eb4ecc79b6a83.camel@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <DM6PR04MB657559FA01C44B411BBDBDBCFCC70@DM6PR04MB6575.namprd04.prod.outlook.com>
On Mon, 2020-12-14 at 22:13 +0000, Avri Altman wrote:
> Bean Hi,
> I support this series.
> I think it is a good idea to print the response on complete,
> But you need to change the prefix strings, otherwise you are breaking
> the current parsers.
>
> Say that you have a trace log, generated sometime during 2020 using
> the current upiu trace.
> It would look something like:
> "send" <request upiu>
> "complete" <request upiu>
>
> And another log generated sometime during 2021 after your change is
> merged:
> "send" <request upiu>
> "complete" < ****response upiu ****>
>
> The current parser won't be able to differentiate between those logs.
> Just change the prefix strings to be "send_req" and "complete_rsp",
> or something,
> so the parsing tools that support the new format will be able to
> differentiate it from the old one.
Avri,
I still don't understand, this change doesn't break you current parser.
if you still trace "send", "complete", "CDB", "query_send/complte",
they are still there, doesn't change. I suggest you just run on your
system. see if there is conflict.
Regarding your suggestion:
This is not problem now, we just change this definition.
do you mean just "send" and "complete" or all?
#define
UFS_CMD_TRACE_STRINGS \
EM(UFS_CMD_SEND, "send_req") \
EM(UFS_CMD_COMP, "complete_rsp") \
below also need add "req" and "rsp"?
EM(UFS_DEV_COMP, "dev_complete_rsp") \
EM(UFS_QUERY_SEND, "query_send") \
EM(UFS_QUERY_COMP, "query_complete") \
EM(UFS_QUERY_ERR, "query_complete_err") \
EM(UFS_TM_SEND, "tm_send") \
EM(UFS_TM_COMP, "tm_complete") \
EM(UFS_TM_ERR, "tm_complete_err")
>
> Also, once the parser can differentiate the new format from the old,
> whatever follows its fine: cdb / osf / tsf or whatever makes sense to
> you.
>
> Thanks,
> Avri
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-12-14 22:38 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-12-14 20:20 [PATCH v3 0/6] Several changes for the UPIU trace Bean Huo
2020-12-14 20:20 ` [PATCH v3 1/6] scsi: ufs: Remove stringize operator '#' restriction Bean Huo
2020-12-14 21:23 ` Joe Perches
2020-12-14 22:26 ` Bean Huo
2020-12-14 23:11 ` David Laight
2020-12-14 23:21 ` Steven Rostedt
2020-12-14 20:20 ` [PATCH v3 2/6] scsi: ufs: Use __print_symbolic() for UFS trace string print Bean Huo
2020-12-14 20:20 ` [PATCH v3 3/6] scsi: ufs: Don't call trace_ufshcd_upiu() in case trace poit is disabled Bean Huo
2020-12-14 20:20 ` [PATCH v3 4/6] scsi: ufs: Distinguish between query REQ and query RSP in query trace Bean Huo
2020-12-14 20:20 ` [PATCH v3 5/6] scsi: ufs: Distinguish between TM request UPIU and response UPIU in TM UPIU trace Bean Huo
2020-12-14 20:20 ` [PATCH v3 6/6] scsi: ufs: Make UPIU trace easier differentiate among CDB, OSF, and TM Bean Huo
2020-12-14 22:13 ` [PATCH v3 0/6] Several changes for the UPIU trace Avri Altman
2020-12-14 22:37 ` Bean Huo [this message]
2020-12-15 22:18 ` Bean Huo
2021-01-04 20:39 ` Bean Huo
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=01a4472065034527d57b0866750eb4ecc79b6a83.camel@gmail.com \
--to=huobean@gmail.com \
--cc=Avri.Altman@wdc.com \
--cc=alim.akhtar@samsung.com \
--cc=asutoshd@codeaurora.org \
--cc=beanhuo@micron.com \
--cc=bvanassche@acm.org \
--cc=cang@codeaurora.org \
--cc=jejb@linux.ibm.com \
--cc=joe@perches.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=martin.petersen@oracle.com \
--cc=rostedt@goodmis.org \
--cc=stanley.chu@mediatek.com \
--cc=tomas.winkler@intel.com \
/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
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
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).