Re: [RFC 3/9] ext4: Add couple of more fast_commit tracepoints

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Wed 23-02-22 15:41:59, Ritesh Harjani wrote:
> On 22/02/23 10:40AM, Jan Kara wrote:
> > On Wed 23-02-22 02:04:11, Ritesh Harjani wrote:
> > > This adds two more tracepoints for ext4_fc_track_template() &
> > > ext4_fc_cleanup() which are helpful in debugging some fast_commit issues.
> > >
> > > Signed-off-by: Ritesh Harjani <riteshh@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >
> > So why is this more useful than trace_ext4_fc_track_range() and other
> > tracepoints? I don't think it provides any more information? What am I
> > missing?
> 
> Thanks Jan for all the reviews.
> 
> So ext4_fc_track_template() adds almost all required information
> (including the caller info) in this one trace point along with transaction tid
> which is useful for tracking issue similar to what is mentioned in Patch-9.
> 
> (race with if inode is part of two transactions tid where jbd2 full commit
> may begin for txn n-1 while inode is still in sbi->s_fc_q[MAIN])
 
I understand commit tid is interesting but cannot we just add it to
tracepoints like trace_ext4_fc_track_range() directly? It would seem useful
to have it there and when it is there, the need for
ext4_fc_track_template() is not really big. I don't care too much but
this tracepoint looked a bit superfluous to me.

> And similarly ext4_fc_cleanup() helps with that information about which tid
> completed and whether it was called from jbd2 full commit or from fast_commit.

Yeah, that one is clear.

								Honza
-- 
Jan Kara <jack@xxxxxxxx>
SUSE Labs, CR



[Index of Archives]     [Reiser Filesystem Development]     [Ceph FS]     [Kernel Newbies]     [Security]     [Netfilter]     [Bugtraq]     [Linux FS]     [Yosemite National Park]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Samba]     [Device Mapper]     [Linux Media]

  Powered by Linux