On Thu, 13 Jul 2017, Eric Wheeler wrote: > On Sun, 2 Jul 2017, Coly Li wrote: > > > On 2017/7/1 上午4:42, [email protected] wrote: > > > From: Tang Junhui <[email protected]> > > > > > > Some missed IOs are not counted into cache_misses, this patch fix this > > > issue. > > > > Could you please explain more about, > > - which kind of missed I/O are mot counted > > - where cache_missed is located > > > > This will help the patch to be more understandable. > > Hi Tang, > > I'm waiting to queue this patch pending your response to Coly. Can you > update the message send a v2?
Hi Tang, Can you to an update message and send this in so we can get the cache miss metrics corrected? -- Eric Wheeler > > > > > > > > > > > Signed-off-by: tang.junhui <[email protected]> > > > Reviewed-by: Eric Wheeler <[email protected]> > > > Cc: [email protected] > > > > [snip] > > > > > @@ -758,7 +760,7 @@ static void cached_dev_read_done_bh(struct closure > > > *cl) > > > struct cached_dev *dc = container_of(s->d, struct cached_dev, disk); > > > > > > bch_mark_cache_accounting(s->iop.c, s->d, > > > - !s->cache_miss, s->iop.bypass); > > > + !s->cache_missed, s->iop.bypass); > > > trace_bcache_read(s->orig_bio, !s->cache_miss, s->iop.bypass); > > > > > > Should the above line be changed to, > > trace_bcache_read(s->orig_bio, !s->cache_missed, s->iop.bypass); > > as well ? > > > > > > [snip] > > > > Thanks. > > > > -- > > Coly Li > >
