> > On Mon, 2020-12-07 at 07:57 +0000, Avri Altman wrote: > > > TP_printk( > > > - "%s: %s: HDR:%s, CDB:%s", > > > + "%s: %s: HDR:%s, %s:%s", > > > __get_str(str), __get_str(dev_name), > > > __print_hex(__entry->hdr, sizeof(__entry->hdr)), > > > + __get_str(tsf_type), > > > > This breaks what current parsers expects. > > Why str is not enough to distinguish between the command? > > > > Thanks, > > Avri > > Hi Avri > Tt donesn't break original CDB parser. for the CDB, it is still the > same as before. Here just make Transaction Specific Fields in the UPIU > package much clearer. It does breaks our current parser that expects "CDB:" for all upiu types > > I mentioned in the commits message: > > Transaction Specific Fields (TSF) in the UPIU package could be CDB > (SCSI/UFS Command Descriptor Block), OSF (Opcode Specific Field), and > TM I/O parameter (Task Management Input/Output Parameter). But we > didn't differenciate them. we take all of these as CDB. This is wrong. > > I want to make it clearer and make UPIU trace in line with the Spec. > what's more, how do you filter OSF, TM parameters with current UPIU > trace? you take all of them as CDB? if so, I think, it's better to > change parser. Indeed, it is just a small change, but breaking user-space is not an acceptable approach. Also, the upiu tracer was never meant to be human-readable: it just dump the upiu, Which contains all the info required to parse it anyway, So breaking user-space just to making it more readable doesn't really make sense? Looking at the previous 2 patches of this series, I was hoping that you will do the same for Command upiu, as well? Again - same comment: if you are doing that need to change the str not to break current parsers. Thanks, Avri > > Thanks, > Bean > > > > >
