[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4F0E31D9.3080306@lge.com>
Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2012 10:05:29 +0900
From: Namhyung Kim <namhyung.kim@....com>
To: Tejun Heo <tj@...nel.org>
CC: Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...il.com>, axboe@...nel.dk,
mingo@...hat.com, rostedt@...dmis.org, fweisbec@...il.com,
teravest@...gle.com, slavapestov@...gle.com, ctalbott@...gle.com,
dhsharp@...gle.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
winget@...gle.com, Chanho Park <chanho61.park@...sung.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH RESEND 9/9] block, trace: implement ioblame - IO tracer
with origin tracking
Hi,
2012-01-12 2:06 AM, Tejun Heo wrote:
> Hello,
>
> On Wed, Jan 11, 2012 at 03:15:54PM +0900, Namhyung Kim wrote:
>> How about adding another tracepoint for intent creation to provide
>> raw data as well, somewhere in iob_get_intent() or
>> iob_intent_create() maybe? It can be useful to get those data for
>> further processing IMHO.
>
> While I don't particularly object to that, information and
> notification (via inotify) for that is already available via
> ioblame/intents file which we need regardless of the new tracepoint,
> so it's kinda redundant, isn't it?
>
> Thanks.
>
Yes. But that's a text-based so it might fit better to simple use cases.
If we need further post processing based on intents, it could be better
off having binary interface IMHO. And since we already use tracepoints
anyway, wouldn't it be good to avoid adding another layer of interface
or complexity?
Thanks,
Namhyung Kim
--
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