Re: [PATCH v4 5/5] blktrace: Make init_blk_tracer() asynchronous when trace_async_init set

[Yaxiong Tian]

在 2026/1/30 11:45, Steven Rostedt 写道:
> On Thu, 29 Jan 2026 22:31:16 -0500
> Steven Rostedt <rostedt@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > I added the below patch and have this result:
> >
> >     kworker/u33:1-79      [002] .....     1.840855: trace_event_update_all: Start syncing
> >         swapper/0-1       [005] .....     6.045742: trace_eval_sync: sync maps
> >     kworker/u33:1-79      [002] .....    12.289296: trace_event_update_all: Finish syncing
> >         swapper/0-1       [005] .....    12.289387: trace_eval_sync: sync maps complete
> >
> > Which shows that the final initcall waited for the work queue to complete:
> Switching to printk() gives me the same results:
>
> # dmesg |grep sync
> [    1.117856] Start syncing
> [    4.498360] sync maps
> [   11.173304] Finish syncing
> [   11.175660] sync maps complete
>
> -- Steve

Sorry, yes, no problem. I confirmed that init_blk_tracer() is running 
properly (when executed sequentially) — if there were an issue, it would 
have already gotten stuck in a lock. It seems like this might be related 
to the print buffer. I’ll look into this issue myself.


Back to this topic — I don’t object to that proposal.
I think each has its own advantages. Let’s see what others think.