Re: [Patch v3] block: introduce block_rq_error tracepoint
From: Yang Shi <hidden>
Date: 2022-01-25 19:58:36
Also in:
lkml
On Tue, Jan 25, 2022 at 6:38 AM Steven Rostedt [off-list ref] wrote:
On Tue, 25 Jan 2022 09:37:02 -0500 Steven Rostedt [off-list ref] wrote:quoted
quoted
quoted
+TRACE_EVENT(block_rq_error, + + TP_PROTO(struct request *rq, int error, unsigned int nr_bytes), + + TP_ARGS(rq, error, nr_bytes), + + TP_STRUCT__entry( + __field( dev_t, dev ) + __string( name, rq->rq_disk ? rq->rq_disk->disk_name : "?") + __field( sector_t, sector ) + __field( unsigned int, nr_sector ) + __field( int, error ) + __array( char, rwbs, RWBS_LEN )Why is the above not "__string" ?quoted
quoted
+ ), + + TP_fast_assign( + __entry->dev = rq->rq_disk ? disk_devt(rq->rq_disk) : 0; + __assign_str(name, rq->rq_disk ? rq->rq_disk->disk_name : "?");__assign_str() will not work on an __array() type. It only works here because you added it at the end, but it's just shear luck that it didn't crash.Never mind :-p I see the above is for name which is __string, and the array is for rwbs which is filled below. I need to finish my first cup of coffee before reviewing patches.
Never mind. Other than the code restructure, I also found some data structure (struct request) and function (blk_fill_rwbs) change. I think I'd better rebase the patch to 5.17-rc1 then resubmit it. Since there is no fundamental change to the patch, can I keep your reviewed-by tag?
-- Stevequoted
quoted
quoted
+ __entry->sector = blk_rq_pos(rq); + __entry->nr_sector = nr_bytes >> 9; + __entry->error = error; + + blk_fill_rwbs(__entry->rwbs, rq->cmd_flags, nr_bytes); + ), + + TP_printk("%d,%d %s %s %llu + %u [%d]", + MAJOR(__entry->dev), MINOR(__entry->dev), + __get_str(name), __entry->rwbs, + (unsigned long long)__entry->sector, + __entry->nr_sector, __entry->error) +); +