[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <e89de62e-e19a-1eeb-d180-a308cbf97c03@arm.com>
Date: Tue, 3 Oct 2023 16:01:30 +0100
From: Christian Loehle <christian.loehle@....com>
To: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Cc: Zheng Yejian <zhengyejian1@...wei.com>, mhiramat@...nel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-trace-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-doc@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] tracing: document buffer_size_kb more precisely
On 02/10/2023 16:09, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Tue, 26 Sep 2023 11:38:14 +0100
> Christian Loehle <christian.loehle@....com> wrote:
>
>>>> @@ -191,7 +191,7 @@ of ftrace. Here is a list of some of the key files:
>>>> A few extra pages may be allocated to accommodate buffer management
>>>> meta-data. If the last page allocated has room for more bytes
>>>> than requested, the rest of the page will be used,
>>>> - making the actual allocation bigger than requested or shown.
>>>> + making the actual allocation bigger than requested.
>>>
>>> Hi, the actual allocation should still be bigger than shown due to the
>>> loss of accuracy when doing unit conversion from bytes to kilobytes (see
>>> tracing_entries_read()).
>>>
>> Right, the sysfs obviously only allows for KB aligned setting, but you're right.
>> If set on the cmdline non-KB multiples are possible and accuracy is lost.
>> Nevermind then.
>
> I'm assuming this patch can be dropped?
>
> -- Steve
Yes please drop it, there's probably still some room for improvement for clarity,
but this patch is not correct.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists