From: Namhyung Kim <firstname.lastname@example.org>
To: Tejun Heo <email@example.com>
Cc: Jens Axboe <firstname.lastname@example.org>,
Steven Rostedt <email@example.com>,
Subject: Re: [PATCH] block: add missing block_bio_complete() tracepoint
Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2012 11:22:29 +0900 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4F25FEE5.firstname.lastname@example.org> (raw)
2012-01-30 10:47 AM, Tejun Heo wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 30, 2012 at 10:44:19 AM +0900, Namhyung Kim wrote:
>> The userland tool cannot distinguish bounced bio from original one
>> at completion TP, but it can expect there will be a duplicated
>> BLK_TA_COMPLETE as it sees BLK_TA_BOUNCE for the bio before.
>> Filtering it out from kernel side seems to hide a real information
>> that (paranoid?) user might want to get, and it looks like providing
>> "polcy not mechanism" IMHO. That's why I changed my mind finally.
>> I cannot think of the downside, anyway it's not a big deal, if you
>> think it's wrong choice, I'm OK to change it again.
> It's just that this patch as it stands will break the existing tools
> and is likely to cause some amount of head scratching for blktrace
> users upgrading to new kernel with existing userland, so yeah, I think
> it should be filtered in kernel from blktrace.c.
Will it break blktrace? Looking at the code, not tested though, it will
just add one more 'C' line for bounced bio, and that's it? The blktrace
will get way more 'C' lines for normal request based devices and it
needs to be handled anyway. Am I missing something?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2012-01-30 2:22 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2012-01-29 9:41 [PATCH] block: add missing block_bio_complete() tracepoint Namhyung Kim
2012-01-29 19:24 ` Tejun Heo
2012-01-30 1:44 ` Namhyung Kim
2012-01-30 1:47 ` Tejun Heo
2012-01-30 2:22 ` Namhyung Kim [this message]
2012-01-30 2:30 ` Tejun Heo
2012-01-30 2:49 ` Namhyung Kim
2012-01-30 2:53 ` Tejun Heo
2012-01-30 5:51 ` Namhyung Kim
2012-01-30 5:54 ` Tejun Heo
2012-01-30 6:02 ` Namhyung Kim
2012-01-30 6:38 ` Namhyung Kim
2012-01-30 17:05 ` Tejun Heo
2012-01-31 6:30 ` Namhyung Kim
2012-01-31 10:39 ` Tejun Heo
2012-02-01 2:18 ` Namhyung Kim
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:
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
* 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).