Hi Stefan, On Wed, Aug 07, 2019 at 02:28:36PM +0100, Stefan Hajnoczi wrote: > On Mon, Jul 29, 2019 at 05:34:29PM -0400, Masayoshi Mizuma wrote: > > From: Masayoshi Mizuma <[email protected]> > > > > This patch series introduce some tracepoints. It will be > > useful to debug the I/O request flow. > > > > New trace events: > > > > - virtiofs_request_dispatched > > - virtiofs_request_done > > - virtiofs_hiprio_request_dispatched > > - virtiofs_hiprio_request_done > > > > Above trace events is added to the following functions as > > the tracepoints: > > > > - virtio_fs_enqueue_req > > - virtio_fs_requests_done_work > > - virtio_fs_hiprio_dispatch_work > > - virtio_fs_hiprio_done_work > > > > Example of the trace record: > > > > cat-1420 [002] .... 34.687462: virtiofs_request_dispatched: opcode > > FUSE_READ unique 0x1a nodeid 0x2 in.len 80 flags ISREPLY|WAITING|SENT > > notify 1 > > kworker/4:1-67 [004] .... 34.687531: virtiofs_request_done: opcode > > FUSE_READ > > unique 0x1a nodeid 0x2 in.len 80 flags ISREPLY|WAITING > > > > Masayoshi Mizuma (2): > > add ftrace events > > add tracepoints > > > > fs/fuse/virtio_fs.c | 21 ++++ > > include/trace/events/virtiofs.h | 195 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > > 2 files changed, 216 insertions(+) > > create mode 100644 include/trace/events/virtiofs.h > > Looks good. Two suggestions although I don't have a strong opinion: > > 1. Please use "virtio_fs" instead of "virtiofs" for consistency with the > existing kernel code.
OK, I use virtio_fs. > > 2. Please consider adding generic fuse.ko trace events for the request > lifecycle so both traditional FUSE and virtio-fs can benefit. The > argument against this is that your patches correspond more closely to > virtqueue activity than tracepoints in the shared FUSE code, but I > wanted to mention the idea. Yeah, it's a good idea to add generic fuse.ko trace events. Thanks! Masa
