From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:48092) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Upddo-0005KW-Cl for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 20 Jun 2013 08:07:06 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Upddj-0003Bh-Db for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 20 Jun 2013 08:07:04 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:38345) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Upddj-0003BW-5A for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Thu, 20 Jun 2013 08:06:59 -0400 Date: Thu, 20 Jun 2013 14:06:55 +0200 From: Stefan Hajnoczi Message-ID: <20130620120655.GC16926@stefanha-thinkpad.redhat.com> References: <1369917299-5725-1-git-send-email-stefanha@redhat.com> <1369917299-5725-4-git-send-email-stefanha@redhat.com> <20130619105015.GA2934@dhcp-200-207.str.redhat.com> <51C193C6.8010906@redhat.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <51C193C6.8010906@redhat.com> Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v5 03/11] block: add basic backup support to block driver List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: Paolo Bonzini Cc: Kevin Wolf , Fam Zheng , qemu-devel@nongnu.org, dietmar@proxmox.com, imain@redhat.com, xiawenc@linux.vnet.ibm.com On Wed, Jun 19, 2013 at 01:19:34PM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > Il 19/06/2013 12:50, Kevin Wolf ha scritto: > >> > + > >> > + DPRINTF("%s enter %s C%" PRId64 " %" PRId64 " %d\n", > >> > + __func__, bdrv_get_device_name(bs), start, sector_num, nb_sectors); > > Maybe put the first "%s" and __func__ directly into the DPRINTF macro? > > > > Or just use tracepoints. backup_do_cow could definitely be one, and it > would subsume another DPRINTF ("backup_run loop"). > > hbitmap_get and block_job_completed are two other useful tracepoint that > is not present. > > All that's left then are the DPRINTF for failed readv and writev, which > could also be useful in generic code (bdrv_co_*_done). > > Can be done as a follow-up, of course. I need to respin anyway. The only reason for DPRINTF() is that I originally wanted to change as little as possible from the orginal patch. But we've gone so far we might as well do this too :). Stefan