[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <YfJrR7nIw0fbHLVj@infradead.org>
Date: Thu, 27 Jan 2022 01:52:07 -0800
From: "hch@...radead.org" <hch@...radead.org>
To: Chaitanya Kulkarni <chaitanyak@...dia.com>
Cc: Yang Shi <shy828301@...il.com>,
"xiyou.wangcong@...il.com" <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com>,
"linux-block@...r.kernel.org" <linux-block@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"axboe@...nel.dk" <axboe@...nel.dk>,
"hch@...radead.org" <hch@...radead.org>,
"rostedt@...dmis.org" <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Subject: Re: [v5 PATCH] block: introduce block_rq_error tracepoint
On Thu, Jan 27, 2022 at 08:02:26AM +0000, Chaitanya Kulkarni wrote:
> > + __field( unsigned int, nr_sector )
> > + __field( int, error )
> > + __array( char, rwbs, RWBS_LEN )
> > + ),
> > +
> > + TP_fast_assign(
> > + __entry->dev = rq->q->disk ? disk_devt(rq->q->disk) : 0;
> > + __assign_str(name, rq->q->disk ? rq->q->disk->disk_name : "?");
>
> Did you verify that rq->q->disk NULL checks are must in this checkout
> for blk_update_request() ?
Yes, we need this.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists