On Thu, 2025-07-31 at 13:04 -0400, Mike Snitzer wrote: > On Thu, Jul 31, 2025 at 11:31:29AM -0400, Jeff Layton wrote: > > On Wed, 2025-07-30 at 19:05 -0400, Mike Snitzer wrote: > > > From: Mike Snitzer <snitzer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > > > Rename nfsd_read_vector_dio trace event to nfsd_analyze_dio and update > > > it so that it provides useful tracing for both READ and WRITE. This > > > prepares for nfsd_vfs_write() to also make use of it when handling > > > misaligned WRITEs. > > > > > > Signed-off-by: Mike Snitzer <snitzer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > --- > > > fs/nfsd/trace.h | 37 ++++++++++++++++++++++++------------- > > > fs/nfsd/vfs.c | 11 ++++++----- > > > 2 files changed, 30 insertions(+), 18 deletions(-) > > > > > > diff --git a/fs/nfsd/trace.h b/fs/nfsd/trace.h > > > index 55055482f8a8..51b47fd041a8 100644 > > > --- a/fs/nfsd/trace.h > > > +++ b/fs/nfsd/trace.h > > > @@ -473,41 +473,52 @@ DEFINE_NFSD_IO_EVENT(write_done); > > > DEFINE_NFSD_IO_EVENT(commit_start); > > > DEFINE_NFSD_IO_EVENT(commit_done); > > > > > > -TRACE_EVENT(nfsd_read_vector_dio, > > > +TRACE_EVENT(nfsd_analyze_dio, > > > TP_PROTO(struct svc_rqst *rqstp, > > > struct svc_fh *fhp, > > > + u32 rw, > > > > I would do this a bit differently. You're hardcoding READ and WRITE > > into both tracepoints. I would turn this trace event into a class a'la > > DECLARE_EVENT_CLASS, and then just define two different tracepoints > > (maybe trace_nfsd_analyze_read/write_dio). Then you can just drop the > > above u32 field, and it'll still be evident whether it's a read or > > write in the log. > > Seems overkill to me, and also forces the need for user to enable > discrete tracepoints. Could be good, could be bad. > > But if I should be taking your feedback as: "do what Jeff suggested", > that's fine too, happy to do so! ;) > I'd prefer it changed. It's pretty simple to convert a TRACE_EVENT to a tracepoint class. It'll also consume less memory. -- Jeff Layton <jlayton@xxxxxxxxxx>
