linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] block: add calls to split trace point

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: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Wed, 2 Dec 2015 22:09:18 +0300
From:	Mike Krinkin <krinkin.m.u@...il.com>
To:	Jens Axboe <axboe@...nel.dk>
Cc:	Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>, kent.overstreet@...il.com,
	dmonakhov@...nvz.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] block: add calls to split trace point

On Wed, Dec 02, 2015 at 10:06:09AM -0700, Jens Axboe wrote:
> On 12/02/2015 01:25 AM, Mike Krinkin wrote:
> >Hi Jens,
> >
> >i would like to check status of the patch, will the patch be applied?
> >
> 
> Why aren't you just putting the split trace call into blk_queue_split()?

Do you mean after split? Something like this:

	if (split) {
		/* there isn't chance to merge the splitted bio */
		split->bi_rw |= REQ_NOMERGE;

		bio_chain(split, *bio);
		trace_block_split(q, split, bio->bi_iter.bi_sector);
		generic_make_request(*bio);
		*bio = split;
	}

block_split trace event docs says that it expects "bio being split", i
understood it as "bio before split". But scarcely someone depends on
this behaviour, so i'll resend the patch, is it ok?
--
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/