Re: [PATCH 1/2] block: improve print_req_error

[Hannes Reinecke <hare@suse.de>]

On 6/17/19 6:49 PM, Chaitanya Kulkarni wrote:
> On 06/17/2019 01:43 AM, Hannes Reinecke wrote:
>> On 6/11/19 10:02 PM, Chaitanya Kulkarni wrote:
>>> From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
>>>
>>> Print the calling function instead of print_req_error as a prefix, and
>>> print the operation and op_flags separately instead of the whole field.
>>>
>>> Signed-off-by: Chaitanya Kulkarni <chaitanya.kulkarni@wdc.com>
>>> ---
>>>   block/blk-core.c | 16 +++++++++-------
>>>   1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
>>>
>>> diff --git a/block/blk-core.c b/block/blk-core.c
>>> index ee1b35fe8572..d1a227cfb72e 100644
>>> --- a/block/blk-core.c
>>> +++ b/block/blk-core.c
>>> @@ -167,18 +167,20 @@ int blk_status_to_errno(blk_status_t status)
>>>   }
>>>   EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(blk_status_to_errno);
>>>
>>> -static void print_req_error(struct request *req, blk_status_t status)
>>> +static void print_req_error(struct request *req, blk_status_t status,
>>> +		const char *caller)
>>>   {
>>>   	int idx = (__force int)status;
>>>
>>>   	if (WARN_ON_ONCE(idx >= ARRAY_SIZE(blk_errors)))
>>>   		return;
>>>
>>> -	printk_ratelimited(KERN_ERR "%s: %s error, dev %s, sector %llu flags %x\n",
>>> -				__func__, blk_errors[idx].name,
>>> -				req->rq_disk ?  req->rq_disk->disk_name : "?",
>>> -				(unsigned long long)blk_rq_pos(req),
>>> -				req->cmd_flags);
>>> +	printk_ratelimited(KERN_ERR
>>> +		"%s: %s error, dev %s, sector %llu op 0x%x flags 0x%x\n",
>>> +		caller, blk_errors[idx].name,
>>> +		req->rq_disk ?  req->rq_disk->disk_name : "?",
>>> +		blk_rq_pos(req), req_op(req),
>>> +		req->cmd_flags & ~REQ_OP_MASK);
>>>   }
>>>
>>>   static void req_bio_endio(struct request *rq, struct bio *bio,
>>> @@ -1360,7 +1362,7 @@ bool blk_update_request(struct request *req, blk_status_t error,
>>>
>>>   	if (unlikely(error && !blk_rq_is_passthrough(req) &&
>>>   		     !(req->rq_flags & RQF_QUIET)))
>>> -		print_req_error(req, error);
>>> +		print_req_error(req, error, __func__);
>>>
>>>   	blk_account_io_completion(req, nr_bytes);
>>>
>>>
>> I did ask this already, but didn't get an answer:
>> Why do we have the __func__ argument?
>> Can it print anything else than 'blk_update_request' ?
>> If so, can't it be dropped?
> Thanks for looking into this. The caller argument I think is useful for 
> future use if this function gets called from different places.
> 
> Are you okay with that ?
> 
Yes, I am.

Reviewed-by: Hannes Reinecke <hare@suse.com>

Cheers,

Hannes
-- 
Dr. Hannes Reinecke		   Teamlead Storage & Networking
hare@suse.de			               +49 911 74053 688
SUSE LINUX GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg
GF: Felix Imendörffer, Mary Higgins, Sri Rasiah
HRB 21284 (AG Nürnberg)