linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] scsi:ufs:core: Add trace READ(16)/WRITE(16) 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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <da300eb6-7a97-438a-8831-5564c8a36e0a@oppo.com>
Date: Fri, 27 Sep 2024 10:15:31 +0800
From: liuderong <liuderong@...o.com>
To: Bart Van Assche <bvanassche@....org>, alim.akhtar@...sung.com,
 avri.altman@....com
Cc: linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
 Jaegeuk Kim <jaegeuk@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] scsi:ufs:core: Add trace READ(16)/WRITE(16) commands





> On 9/24/24 7:48 PM, liuderong@...o.com wrote:
>> From: liuderong <liuderong@...o.com>
>>
>> For sd_zbc_read_zones, READ(16)/WRITE(16) are mandatory for ZBC disks.
>> Currently, when printing the trace:ufshcd_command on zone UFS devices,
>> the LBA and SIZE fields appear invalid,
>> making it difficult to trace commands.
>> So add trace READ(16)/WRITE(16) commands for zone ufs device.
>>
>> Trace sample:
>> ufshcd_command: send_req: 1d84000.ufshc: tag: 31, DB: 0x0,
>> size: -1, IS: 0, LBA: 0, opcode: 0x8a (WRITE_16), group_id: 0x0, 
>> hwq_id: 7
>> ufshcd_command: complete_rsp: 1d84000.ufshc: tag: 31, DB: 0x0,
>> size: -1, IS: 0, LBA: 0, opcode: 0x8a (WRITE_16), group_id: 0x0, 
>> hwq_id: 7
>>
>> Signed-off-by: liuderong <liuderong@...o.com>
>> ---
>>   drivers/ufs/core/ufshcd.c | 8 ++++++--
>>   1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/drivers/ufs/core/ufshcd.c b/drivers/ufs/core/ufshcd.c
>> index 5e3c67e..9e5e903 100644
>> --- a/drivers/ufs/core/ufshcd.c
>> +++ b/drivers/ufs/core/ufshcd.c
>> @@ -434,15 +434,19 @@ static void ufshcd_add_command_trace(struct 
>> ufs_hba *hba, unsigned int tag,
>>         opcode = cmd->cmnd[0];
>>   -    if (opcode == READ_10 || opcode == WRITE_10) {
>> +    if (opcode == READ_10 || opcode == READ_16 ||
>> +        opcode == WRITE_10 || opcode == WRITE_16) {
>>           /*
>> -         * Currently we only fully trace read(10) and write(10) 
>> commands
>> +         * Currently we only fully trace the following commands,
>> +         * read(10),read(16),write(10), and write(16)
>>            */
>>           transfer_len =
>> be32_to_cpu(lrbp->ucd_req_ptr->sc.exp_data_transfer_len);
>>           lba = scsi_get_lba(cmd);
>>           if (opcode == WRITE_10)
>>               group_id = lrbp->cmd->cmnd[6];
>> +        if (opcode == WRITE_16)
>> +            group_id = lrbp->cmd->cmnd[14];
>>       } else if (opcode == UNMAP) {
>>           /*
>>            * The number of Bytes to be unmapped beginning with the lba.
>
> To me the above patch looks like a subset of this patch from 1.5y ago:
> https://lore.kernel.org/linux-scsi/20230215190448.1687786-1-jaegeuk@kernel.org/ 
>
>
> Bart.
Hi Bart，

OK, do we have plan to remove the trace: ufshcd_command?
I think if we want to observe info closest to the ufs device(such as ufs 
io latency), the ufshcd trace is more appropriate.
What do you think?

Thanks，
Derong