Messages in this thread Patch in this message | | | From | Stefan Hajnoczi <> | Subject | [PATCH][trace-cmd] blk plugin: replace BLK_TC_BARRIER with BLK_TC_FLUSH/BLK_TC_FUA | Date | Sun, 8 Jan 2012 13:19:21 +0000 |
| |
The BLK_TC_BARRIER flag was dropped in Linux commit c09c47caedc in August 2011. The blk plugin fails to build against recent kernel headers. Since no flag bits were left, the new BLK_TC_FLUSH flag reused the BLK_TC_BARRIER bit. The new BLK_TC_FUA flag was also added.
This patch updates fill_rwbs() to reflect the new BLK_TC_FLUSH/BLK_TC_FUA flags. This allows plugin_blk.c to build successfully on recent kernels. The drawback is that this breaks the build for pre-c09c47caedc kernel headers.
Signed-off-by: Stefan Hajnoczi <stefanha@linux.vnet.ibm.com> --- There is an alternative version of this patch with a build test in the Makefile so that we know whether to use BLK_TC_BARRIER or BLK_TC_FLUSH/BLK_TC_FUA. That would support both old and new kernel headers using a HAVE_BLK_TC_FLUSH #ifdef.
I wasn't able to find the right makefile shell escaping magic to get the build-test function to work. If anyone knows how to test a snippet like the following, then that would be nicer:
#include <linux/blktrace_api.h> int main(void) { return BLK_TC_FLUSH; }
plugin_blk.c | 7 +++++-- 1 files changed, 5 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/plugin_blk.c b/plugin_blk.c index 9327b17..4352cb7 100644 --- a/plugin_blk.c +++ b/plugin_blk.c @@ -54,6 +54,9 @@ static void fill_rwbs(char *rwbs, int action, unsigned int bytes) goto out; } + if (tc & BLK_TC_FLUSH) + rwbs[i++] = 'F'; + if (tc & BLK_TC_DISCARD) rwbs[i++] = 'D'; else if (tc & BLK_TC_WRITE) @@ -63,10 +66,10 @@ static void fill_rwbs(char *rwbs, int action, unsigned int bytes) else rwbs[i++] = 'N'; + if (tc & BLK_TC_FUA) + rwbs[i++] = 'F'; if (tc & BLK_TC_AHEAD) rwbs[i++] = 'A'; - if (tc & BLK_TC_BARRIER) - rwbs[i++] = 'B'; if (tc & BLK_TC_SYNC) rwbs[i++] = 'S'; if (tc & BLK_TC_META) -- 1.7.7.3
| |