[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20200501150626.GM11244@42.do-not-panic.com>
Date: Fri, 1 May 2020 15:06:26 +0000
From: Luis Chamberlain <mcgrof@...nel.org>
To: Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
Cc: 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 Wed, Apr 29, 2020 at 11:49:37AM +0200, Greg KH wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 29, 2020 at 07:46:26AM +0000, Luis Chamberlain wrote:
> > diff --git a/kernel/trace/blktrace.c b/kernel/trace/blktrace.c
> > index 5c52976bd762..383045f67cb8 100644
> > --- a/kernel/trace/blktrace.c
> > +++ b/kernel/trace/blktrace.c
> > @@ -516,6 +518,11 @@ static int do_blk_trace_setup(struct request_queue *q, char *name, dev_t dev,
> > */
> > strreplace(buts->name, '/', '_');
> >
> > + if (q->blk_trace) {
> > + pr_warn("Concurrent blktraces are not allowed\n");
> > + return -EBUSY;
>
> 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.
Luis
Powered by blists - more mailing lists