Re: [PATCH RESEND 9/9] block, trace: implement ioblame - IO tracerwith origin tracking

[Namhyung Kim]

Hello,

2012-01-12 10:14 AM, Tejun Heo wrote:
> Hello,
>
> On Wed, Jan 11, 2012 at 5:05 PM, Namhyung Kim<namhyung.kim@xxxxxxx>  wrote:
> > Yes. But that's a text-based so it might fit better to simple use cases. If
> > we need further post processing based on intents, it could be better off
> > having binary interface IMHO. And since we already use tracepoints anyway,
> > wouldn't it be good to avoid adding another layer of interface or
> > complexity?
>
> The thing is that all entries are needed for any post processing, not
> only the new ones. To use TP, either there needs to be special
> "trigger the TP for all existing entries" switch somewhere or
> ioblame/intents file needs to be read for existing entries. Even then,
> TPs aren't guaranteed to be reliable. There's no way to detect
> overflow and re-emit the event. It just isn't the right interface. The
> previous version had intents_bin file in binary format but given that
> there aren't too many of intents, binary interface didn't seem
> necessary and ripped it out. Adding it back isn't difficult at all but
> I'm not sure that's a good idea. It's not like parsing the intents
> file is difficult.
>
> Thanks.

Why do we need to trigger the TP for existing ones as we keep each entry 
at its creation? Maybe I'm missing something?

Thanks,
Namhyung Kim
--
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/