[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <5e3d8652-7cab-a6ea-a943-80950a0f9bed@nvidia.com>
Date: Tue, 28 Mar 2023 17:58:24 +0000
From: Chaitanya Kulkarni <chaitanyak@...dia.com>
To: Zheng Yejian <zhengyejian1@...wei.com>,
"axboe@...nel.dk" <axboe@...nel.dk>,
"rostedt@...dmis.org" <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
"mhiramat@...nel.org" <mhiramat@...nel.org>
CC: "linux-block@...r.kernel.org" <linux-block@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-trace-kernel@...r.kernel.org"
<linux-trace-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] blktrace: Gracefully return if fail in
blk_register_tracepoints()
On 3/28/23 02:46, Zheng Yejian wrote:
> Currently blk_register_tracepoints() WARN for every registration failure
> of block tracepoint, however, blk_trace can still be setup-ed.
>
> It seems better to cleanup registered tracepoints and return error when
> a certain registration failed, even if it's a small probability, and
> users can know the error and do blk_trace setup again.
>
> Signed-off-by: Zheng Yejian <zhengyejian1@...wei.com>
> ---
>
So far I'm fine with current code as this adds a lot of code.
I've thought of doing this when I worked on blktrace extension, but
others are okay with it sure ..
-ck
Powered by blists - more mailing lists