Re: blktrace ftrace plugin, was Re: Receive side performance issuewith multi-10-GigE and NUMA
From: Ingo Molnar
Date: Thu Aug 27 2009 - 05:12:52 EST
* Jens Axboe <jens.axboe@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 26 2009, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 10:40:27PM +0200, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > > We are also converting non-trivial plugins to generic tracepoints. A
> > > recent example are the system call tracepoints, but we also
> > > converted blktrace and kmemtrace to generic tracepoints.
> >
> > On something semi-related: Any reason to keep the blktrace
> > ftrace plugin around? I don't think there's much point in it.
> > It only got added in 2.6.29, and all the blktrace tooling just
> > uses the legacy ioctls. All new uses should just use the
> > TRACE_EVENT output.
>
> Lets kill it.
Agreed.
I think we should keep the relayfs and ioctl compatibility bits
though: blktrace has a mature user-space environment with many
years of installed base.
We could even move those bits back to block/blktrace_compat.c or so
(after the ftrace plugin bits are removed), to make sure it's nicely
isolated.
What do you think?
Ingo
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/