linux-kernel - RE: [PATCH v1 2/2] scsi: ufs: Add trace event for UIC commands

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]
Message-ID: <SN6PR04MB4640968DCD865651AFA8925DFC9E0@SN6PR04MB4640.namprd04.prod.outlook.com>
Date:   Sat, 13 Jun 2020 10:48:21 +0000
From:   Avri Altman <Avri.Altman@....com>
To:     Stanley Chu <stanley.chu@...iatek.com>,
        "linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org" <linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org>,
        "martin.petersen@...cle.com" <martin.petersen@...cle.com>,
        "alim.akhtar@...sung.com" <alim.akhtar@...sung.com>,
        "jejb@...ux.ibm.com" <jejb@...ux.ibm.com>,
        "asutoshd@...eaurora.org" <asutoshd@...eaurora.org>
CC:     "beanhuo@...ron.com" <beanhuo@...ron.com>,
        "cang@...eaurora.org" <cang@...eaurora.org>,
        "matthias.bgg@...il.com" <matthias.bgg@...il.com>,
        "bvanassche@....org" <bvanassche@....org>,
        "linux-mediatek@...ts.infradead.org" 
        <linux-mediatek@...ts.infradead.org>,
        "linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org" 
        <linux-arm-kernel@...ts.infradead.org>,
        "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        "kuohong.wang@...iatek.com" <kuohong.wang@...iatek.com>,
        "peter.wang@...iatek.com" <peter.wang@...iatek.com>,
        "chun-hung.wu@...iatek.com" <chun-hung.wu@...iatek.com>,
        "andy.teng@...iatek.com" <andy.teng@...iatek.com>,
        "chaotian.jing@...iatek.com" <chaotian.jing@...iatek.com>,
        "cc.chou@...iatek.com" <cc.chou@...iatek.com>
Subject: RE: [PATCH v1 2/2] scsi: ufs: Add trace event for UIC commands

> +static void ufshcd_add_uic_command_trace(struct ufs_hba *hba,
> +                                        struct uic_command *ucmd,
> +                                        const char *str)
> +{
> +       u32 cmd;
> +
> +       if (!trace_ufshcd_uic_command_enabled())
> +               return;
> +
> +       if (!strcmp(str, "uic_send"))
> +               cmd = ucmd->command;
> +       else
> +               cmd = ufshcd_readl(hba, REG_UIC_COMMAND);
Why on complete you can't just use ucmd->command as well?

> +
> +       trace_ufshcd_uic_command(dev_name(hba->dev), str, cmd,
> +                                ucmd->result,
> +                                ufshcd_readl(hba, REG_UIC_COMMAND_ARG_1),
> +                                ufshcd_readl(hba, REG_UIC_COMMAND_ARG_2),
> +                                ufshcd_readl(hba, REG_UIC_COMMAND_ARG_3));
Why can't you just use the ucmd members?
Why need to read those?

> +}


> +
>  static void ufshcd_add_command_trace(struct ufs_hba *hba,
>                 unsigned int tag, const char *str)
>  {
> @@ -2054,6 +2075,8 @@ ufshcd_dispatch_uic_cmd(struct ufs_hba *hba,
> struct uic_command *uic_cmd)
>         /* Write UIC Cmd */
>         ufshcd_writel(hba, uic_cmd->command & COMMAND_OPCODE_MASK,
>                       REG_UIC_COMMAND);
> +
> +       ufshcd_add_uic_command_trace(hba, uic_cmd, "uic_send");
>  }
> 
>  /**
> @@ -2080,6 +2103,9 @@ ufshcd_wait_for_uic_cmd(struct ufs_hba *hba,
> struct uic_command *uic_cmd)
>         hba->active_uic_cmd = NULL;
>         spin_unlock_irqrestore(hba->host->host_lock, flags);
> 
> +       uic_cmd->result = ret;
> +       ufshcd_add_uic_command_trace(hba, uic_cmd, "uic_complete");
> +
>         return ret;
>  }
Can't you just call the "send" and "complete" from ufshcd_send_uic_cmd?


> 
> @@ -3760,6 +3786,9 @@ static int ufshcd_uic_pwr_ctrl(struct ufs_hba *hba,
> struct uic_command *cmd)
>                 ret = (status != PWR_OK) ? status : -1;
>         }
>  out:
> +       cmd->result = ret;
> +       ufshcd_add_uic_command_trace(hba, cmd, "uic_complete");
> +
>         if (ret) {
>                 ufshcd_print_host_state(hba);
>                 ufshcd_print_pwr_info(hba);
> diff --git a/include/trace/events/ufs.h b/include/trace/events/ufs.h
> index 5f300739240d..cf8d568d5a13 100644
> --- a/include/trace/events/ufs.h
> +++ b/include/trace/events/ufs.h
> @@ -249,6 +249,39 @@ TRACE_EVENT(ufshcd_command,
>         )
>  );
> 
> +TRACE_EVENT(ufshcd_uic_command,
> +       TP_PROTO(const char *dev_name, const char *str, u32 cmd, int result,
> +                u32 arg1, u32 arg2, u32 arg3),
> +
> +       TP_ARGS(dev_name, str, cmd, result, arg1, arg2, arg3),
> +
> +       TP_STRUCT__entry(
> +               __string(dev_name, dev_name)
> +               __string(str, str)
> +               __field(u32, cmd)
> +               __field(int, result)
> +               __field(u32, arg1)
> +               __field(u32, arg2)
> +               __field(u32, arg3)
> +       ),
> +
> +       TP_fast_assign(
> +               __assign_str(dev_name, dev_name);
> +               __assign_str(str, str);
> +               __entry->cmd = cmd;
> +               __entry->result = result;
> +               __entry->arg1 = arg1;
> +               __entry->arg2 = arg2;
> +               __entry->arg3 = arg3;
> +       ),
> +
> +       TP_printk(
> +               "%s: %s: cmd: 0x%x, arg1: 0x%x, arg2: 0x%x, arg3: 0x%x, result: %d",
> +               __get_str(str), __get_str(dev_name), __entry->cmd,
> +               __entry->arg1, __entry->arg2, __entry->arg3, __entry->result
> +       )
Personally, as those trace events aren't very human readable anyway, I would just dump the uic command,
And let the parsers do their job.
And if this is the case, result is redundant as it is part of arg2

Thanks,
Avri

> +);
> +
>  TRACE_EVENT(ufshcd_upiu,
>         TP_PROTO(const char *dev_name, const char *str, void *hdr, void *tsf),
> 
> --
> 2.18.0