On 6/11/25 17:11, Danilo Krummrich wrote: >>>> Mhm, reiterating our internal discussion on the mailing list. >>>> >>>> I think it would be nicer if we could use negative values for the kernel >>>> submissions and positive for userspace. But as discussed internally we >>>> would need to adjust the scheduler trace points for that once more. >>>> >>>> @Philip and @Danilo any opinion on that? >>> >>> Both, the U64_MAX and the positive-negative approach, are a bit hacky. I >>> wonder >>> why we need client_id to be a u64, wouldn't a u32 not be enough? >> >> That can trivially overflow on long running boxes. > > I don't know if "trivially" is the word of choice given that the number is > 4,294,967,295. > > But I did indeed miss that this is a for ever increasing atomic. Why is it an > atomic? Why is it not an IDA?
Well IDA has some extra overhead compared to an ever increasing atomic, additional to that it might not be the best choice to re-use numbers for clients in a trace log. On the other hand using smaller numbers is usually nicer for manual inspection. Regards, Christian.
