[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20200501154050.GO11244@42.do-not-panic.com>
Date: Fri, 1 May 2020 15:40:50 +0000
From: Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@...nel.org>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>
Cc: Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>, axboe@...nel.dk,
viro@...iv.linux.org.uk, bvanassche@....org, rostedt@...dmis.org,
mingo@...hat.com, jack@...e.cz, ming.lei@...hat.com,
nstange@...e.de, akpm@...ux-foundation.org, mhocko@...e.com,
yukuai3@...wei.com, linux-block@...r.kernel.org,
linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-mm@...ck.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 5/6] blktrace: break out of blktrace setup on
concurrent calls
On Fri, May 01, 2020 at 08:34:23AM -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Fri, May 01, 2020 at 03:06:26PM +0000, Luis Chamberlain wrote:
> > > You have access to a block device here, please use dev_warn() instead
> > > here for that, that makes it obvious as to what device a "concurrent
> > > blktrace" was attempted for.
> >
> > The block device may be empty, one example is for scsi-generic, but I'll
> > use buts->name.
>
> Is blktrace on /dev/sg something we intentionally support, or just by
> some accident of history? Given all the pains it causes I'd be tempted
> to just remove the support and see if anyone screams.
>From what I can tell I think it was a historic and brutal mistake. I am
more than happy to remove it.
Re-adding support would just be a symlink.
Luis
Powered by blists - more mailing lists