Re: [PATCH 1/1] nvme: Add verbose error logging
From: Chaitanya Kulkarni <hidden>
Date: 2021-12-13 08:09:51
On 12/12/21 1:52 AM, Sagi Grimberg wrote:
External email: Use caution opening links or attachments On 12/10/21 6:56 PM, Keith Busch wrote:quoted
On Fri, Dec 10, 2021 at 10:54:45AM -0500, Martin K. Petersen wrote:quoted
Hi Chaitanya!quoted
Although I always prefer descriptive error messages, I've not seen even half of these errors in the field. This will :- 1. Increase the size of the driver code. 2. Require constant patching of the driver code when spec is updated, I'm afraid this will turn into churn.Updating the corresponding list in SCSI hasn't been a big problem.quoted
Also, we can easily track down the error in the NVMe spec from the error code that driver is printing currently, is that not sufficient ?Only the block layer status is captured. In addition, customers are not really armed with the NVMe error decoder ring and are left with no explanation as to why an I/O failed. We have had good results in the field with the verbose SCSI error logging and that's why this patch was modeled to work the same way.If they are not familiar with the decoder, does seeing something like "Conflicting Attributes" really provide the user a better sense than "0x280"? Either way, it sounds like they'd just open a bug with someone who is familiar with the spec, in which case numeric codes should be sufficient. Are the existing nvme trace events not providing enough information? The existing ones appear to have even greater detail than what this patch provides. Or is there some other reason why the kernel log is preferred over the event tracer for capturing these types of errors?Maybe the string info be added to the trace events? If so, we may need a verbosity level for the trace to record "only errors". Although the one advantage for the log would be the first time error status (or for generally rare errors).quoted
On the patch itself: I'm not sure having it be a new Kconfig option is a good idea since it requires a recompile to enable/disable. Could this be toggled with a static_key instead so we may disable/enable verbose logging at runtime? The new "struct nvme_string_table" is a bit inefficient. Unknown errors will scan the entire table, which will slow down our hot completion path on any error. The codes are small and mostly sequential, so I think you could create a sparse "static const char * const[]", then the "code" becomes the index that can be looked up in constant time. The total space of the array shouldn't be much different than the proposal.100% agree.
Ideally we should document the performance numbers if we are going to add anything in the fast path.