linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v5] block: Add ioprio to block

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]

Date: Mon, 17 Jun 2024 14:30:42 -0700
From: Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@....org>
To: Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
Cc: dongliang cui <cuidongliang390@...il.com>,
 Dongliang Cui <dongliang.cui@...soc.com>, axboe@...nel.dk,
 mhiramat@...nel.org, mathieu.desnoyers@...icios.com, ebiggers@...nel.org,
 ke.wang@...soc.com, hongyu.jin.cn@...il.com, niuzhiguo84@...il.com,
 hao_hao.wang@...soc.com, linux-block@...r.kernel.org,
 linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, akailash@...gle.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH v5] block: Add ioprio to block_rq tracepoint

On 6/17/24 10:07 AM, Steven Rostedt wrote:
> On Mon, 17 Jun 2024 10:02:48 -0700
> Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@....org> wrote:
> 
>>>> Do we really want to include the constant "[0]" in the tracing output?
>>> This is how it is printed in the source code.
>>>   From the code flow point of view, there is no need to print this value
>>> in trace_block_rq_requeue.
>>> Do we need to consider the issue of uniform printing format? If not, I
>>> think we can delete it.
>>
>> I'm not aware of any other tracing statement that prints out a constant.
>> Is there perhaps something that I'm missing or overlooking?
> 
> The only time that is done, is if the trace event is used in multiple
> places and there's one place that the value will always be the same.

Thanks for the clarification Steven.

Hence:

Reviewed-by: Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@....org>