lists.openwall.net   lists  /  announce  owl-users  owl-dev  john-users  john-dev  passwdqc-users  yescrypt  popa3d-users  /  oss-security  kernel-hardening  musl  sabotage  tlsify  passwords  /  crypt-dev  xvendor  /  Bugtraq  Full-Disclosure  linux-kernel  linux-netdev  linux-ext4  linux-hardening  linux-cve-announce  PHC 
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
 
Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:	Sun, 25 Oct 2009 23:03:21 -0700
From:	Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
To:	Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
	Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
	Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk>, mingo@...e.hu,
	Frederic Weisbecker <fweisbec@...il.com>,
	auke-jan.h.kok@...el.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH] vfs: Add a trace point in the mark_inode_dirty function

On Sun, 25 Oct 2009 22:53:42 -0700 Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org> wrote:

> >From b894af8a33bec621dd1a4126603a3ca372bf0643 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
> From: Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...ux.intel.com>
> Date: Sun, 25 Oct 2009 15:37:04 -0700
> Subject: [PATCH] vfs: Add a trace point in the mark_inode_dirty function
> 
> PowerTOP would like to be able to show who is keeping the disk
> busy by dirtying data. The most logical spot for this is in the vfs
> in the mark_inode_dirty() function. Doing this on the block level
> is not possible because by the time the IO hits the block layer the
> guilty party can no longer be found ("kjournald" and "pdflush" are not
> useful answers to "who caused this file to be dirty).
> 
> The trace point follows the same logic/style as the block_dump code
> and pretty much dumps the same data, just not to dmesg (and thus to
> /var/log/messages) but via the trace events streams.
> 
> ...
>
> @@ -1071,6 +1072,8 @@ void __mark_inode_dirty(struct inode *inode, int flags)
>  	if ((inode->i_state & flags) == flags)
>  		return;
>  
> +	trace_dirty_inode(inode, current);
> +
>  	if (unlikely(block_dump))
>  		block_dump___mark_inode_dirty(inode);
>  

Doesn't powertop also want to know who is spinning up the disk via
buffered reads, direct-io reads and direct-io writes?

That's why the block_dump hook in submit_bio() is there.

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ