Re: blktrace ftrace plugin, was Re: Receive side performance issuewith multi-10-GigE and NUMA

[Ingo Molnar]

* Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> On Wed, Aug 26 2009, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 10:40:27PM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > > We are also converting non-trivial plugins to generic tracepoints. A 
> > > recent example are the system call tracepoints, but we also 
> > > converted blktrace and kmemtrace to generic tracepoints.
> > 
> > On something semi-related: Any reason to keep the blktrace 
> > ftrace plugin around?  I don't think there's much point in it.  
> > It only got added in 2.6.29, and all the blktrace tooling just 
> > uses the legacy ioctls.  All new uses should just use the 
> > TRACE_EVENT output.
> 
> Lets kill it.

Agreed.

I think we should keep the relayfs and ioctl compatibility bits 
though: blktrace has a mature user-space environment with many
years of installed base.

We could even move those bits back to block/blktrace_compat.c or so 
(after the ftrace plugin bits are removed), to make sure it's nicely 
isolated.

What do you think?

	Ingo
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/