From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Date: Mon, 23 Apr 2018 09:34:01 -0400 From: Steven Rostedt To: Steffen Maier Cc: "Bean Huo (beanhuo)" , "axboe@kernel.dk" , "jejb@linux.vnet.ibm.com" , "martin.petersen@oracle.com" , "linux-block@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" , "mingo@redhad.com" , "Bart.VanAssche@sandisk.com" , "rajatja@google.com" Subject: Re: [RESEND PATCH v1 2/2] trace: events: block: Add tag in block trace events Message-ID: <20180423093401.30839625@gandalf.local.home> In-Reply-To: References: <64d6073b28b140cda3e5870a54e0a7bc@SIWEX5A.sing.micron.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII List-ID: On Mon, 23 Apr 2018 14:43:13 +0200 Steffen Maier wrote: > > - TP_printk("[%s] %d", __entry->comm, __entry->nr_rq) > > + TP_printk("[%s] %d %s", __entry->comm, __entry->nr_rq, > > + __entry->explicit ? "Sync" : "Async") > > ); > > > > /** > > This entire hunk does not seem related to this patch description. > Also, I'm not sure trace-cmd and perf et al. could format it accordingly. You mean the "?:" operation? trace-cmd and perf can handle it fine. Just look at the trace event irq_handler_exit: print fmt: "irq=%d ret=%s", REC->irq, REC->ret ? "handled" : "unhandled" # trace-cmd record -e irq_handler_exit # trace-cmd report -0 [001] 856960.382767: irq_handler_exit: irq=29 ret=handled -0 [001] 856961.745640: irq_handler_exit: irq=29 ret=handled -0 [001] 856961.865762: irq_handler_exit: irq=29 ret=handled -- Steve