From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Artem Bityutskiy Subject: Re: [PATCHv4 14/14] writeback: add new tracepoints Date: Sat, 24 Jul 2010 09:01:10 +0300 Message-ID: <1279951270.4655.6.camel@localhost> References: <1279897554-1526-1-git-send-email-dedekind1@gmail.com> <1279897554-1526-15-git-send-email-dedekind1@gmail.com> <20100723162919.GD29633@infradead.org> Reply-To: dedekind1@gmail.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Cc: Jens Axboe , linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org To: Christoph Hellwig Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20100723162919.GD29633@infradead.org> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-fsdevel.vger.kernel.org On Fri, 2010-07-23 at 12:29 -0400, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Fri, Jul 23, 2010 at 06:05:54PM +0300, Artem Bityutskiy wrote: > > From: Artem Bityutskiy > >=20 > > Add 2 new trace points to the periodic write-back wake up case, jus= t like we do > > in the 'bdi_queue_work()' function. Namely, introduce: > >=20 > > 1. trace_writeback_wakeup(bdi) > > 2. trace_writeback_wakeup_nothread(bdi) > >=20 > > The first event is triggered every time we wake up a bdi thread to = start > > periodic background write-out. The second event is triggered only w= hen the bdi > > thread does not exist and should be created by the forker thread. > >=20 > > This patch was suggested by Dave Chinner >=20 > As mentioned before doing the wakeup just for the case where we > really wake up the flusher thead is much better. It's not 100% > clear for bdi_queue_work as we queue the work in either case, but > I'd prefer to fix that one up as well (not in your series anyway) OK, I'll do it your way. Many thanks for review! --=20 Best Regards, Artem Bityutskiy (=D0=90=D1=80=D1=82=D1=91=D0=BC =D0=91=D0=B8=D1=82=D1=8E= =D1=86=D0=BA=D0=B8=D0=B9)