| Message ID | 20190410103646.221275815@linutronix.de (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
| Series | None | expand |
On Wed, Apr 10, 2019 at 12:28:23PM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > Replace the indirection through struct stack_trace with an invocation of > the storage array based interface. > > Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> > Cc: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com> > Cc: Chris Mason <clm@fb.com> > Cc: Josef Bacik <josef@toxicpanda.com> > Cc: linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org > --- > fs/btrfs/ref-verify.c | 15 ++------------- > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-) > > --- a/fs/btrfs/ref-verify.c > +++ b/fs/btrfs/ref-verify.c > @@ -205,28 +205,17 @@ static struct root_entry *lookup_root_en > #ifdef CONFIG_STACKTRACE > static void __save_stack_trace(struct ref_action *ra) > { > - struct stack_trace stack_trace; > - > - stack_trace.max_entries = MAX_TRACE; > - stack_trace.nr_entries = 0; > - stack_trace.entries = ra->trace; > - stack_trace.skip = 2; > - save_stack_trace(&stack_trace); > - ra->trace_len = stack_trace.nr_entries; > + ra->trace_len = stack_trace_save(ra->trace, MAX_TRACE, 2); Stupid question: why are you passing a '2' for 'skipnr' and in stack_trace_save() from your series you set stack_trace::skip as skipnr + 1. Wouldn't this result in a stack_trace::skip = 3? Or is it the number of functions to be skipped and you don't want to have stack_trace_save() saved as well? Thanks, Johannes
On Wed, 10 Apr 2019, Johannes Thumshirn wrote: > On Wed, Apr 10, 2019 at 12:28:23PM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > > Replace the indirection through struct stack_trace with an invocation of > > the storage array based interface. > > > > Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> > > Cc: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com> > > Cc: Chris Mason <clm@fb.com> > > Cc: Josef Bacik <josef@toxicpanda.com> > > Cc: linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org > > --- > > fs/btrfs/ref-verify.c | 15 ++------------- > > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-) > > > > --- a/fs/btrfs/ref-verify.c > > +++ b/fs/btrfs/ref-verify.c > > @@ -205,28 +205,17 @@ static struct root_entry *lookup_root_en > > #ifdef CONFIG_STACKTRACE > > static void __save_stack_trace(struct ref_action *ra) > > { > > - struct stack_trace stack_trace; > > - > > - stack_trace.max_entries = MAX_TRACE; > > - stack_trace.nr_entries = 0; > > - stack_trace.entries = ra->trace; > > - stack_trace.skip = 2; > > - save_stack_trace(&stack_trace); > > - ra->trace_len = stack_trace.nr_entries; > > + ra->trace_len = stack_trace_save(ra->trace, MAX_TRACE, 2); > > > Stupid question: why are you passing a '2' for 'skipnr' and in > stack_trace_save() from your series you set stack_trace::skip as skipnr + 1. > > Wouldn't this result in a stack_trace::skip = 3? Or is it the number of > functions to be skipped and you don't want to have stack_trace_save() saved as > well? Correct. The extra call will shift the skipped one up, so I compensate for that. Thanks, tglx
On Wed, Apr 10, 2019 at 02:05:17PM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > Correct. The extra call will shift the skipped one up, so I compensate for that. OK, then Reviewed-by: Johannes Thumshirn <jthumshirn@suse.de> in case the series goes in.
On Wed, Apr 10, 2019 at 12:28:23PM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > Replace the indirection through struct stack_trace with an invocation of > the storage array based interface. > > Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> > Cc: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com> > Cc: Chris Mason <clm@fb.com> > Cc: Josef Bacik <josef@toxicpanda.com> > Cc: linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org Acked-by: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com>
On Wed, Apr 10, 2019 at 1:06 PM Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> wrote: > > Replace the indirection through struct stack_trace with an invocation of > the storage array based interface. > > Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> > Cc: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com> > Cc: Chris Mason <clm@fb.com> > Cc: Josef Bacik <josef@toxicpanda.com> > Cc: linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org > --- > fs/btrfs/ref-verify.c | 15 ++------------- > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-) > > --- a/fs/btrfs/ref-verify.c > +++ b/fs/btrfs/ref-verify.c > @@ -205,28 +205,17 @@ static struct root_entry *lookup_root_en > #ifdef CONFIG_STACKTRACE > static void __save_stack_trace(struct ref_action *ra) > { > - struct stack_trace stack_trace; > - > - stack_trace.max_entries = MAX_TRACE; > - stack_trace.nr_entries = 0; > - stack_trace.entries = ra->trace; > - stack_trace.skip = 2; > - save_stack_trace(&stack_trace); > - ra->trace_len = stack_trace.nr_entries; > + ra->trace_len = stack_trace_save(ra->trace, MAX_TRACE, 2); Now that stack_trace.skip is gone, it's unclear what this "2" stands for. Maybe add an inline comment saying it's skipnr? (This is probably valid for all other stack_trace_save() callsites) > } > > static void __print_stack_trace(struct btrfs_fs_info *fs_info, > struct ref_action *ra) > { > - struct stack_trace trace; > - > if (ra->trace_len == 0) { > btrfs_err(fs_info, " ref-verify: no stacktrace"); > return; > } > - trace.nr_entries = ra->trace_len; > - trace.entries = ra->trace; > - print_stack_trace(&trace, 2); > + stack_trace_print(ra->trace, ra->trace_len, 2); > } > #else > static void inline __save_stack_trace(struct ref_action *ra) > >
--- a/fs/btrfs/ref-verify.c +++ b/fs/btrfs/ref-verify.c @@ -205,28 +205,17 @@ static struct root_entry *lookup_root_en #ifdef CONFIG_STACKTRACE static void __save_stack_trace(struct ref_action *ra) { - struct stack_trace stack_trace; - - stack_trace.max_entries = MAX_TRACE; - stack_trace.nr_entries = 0; - stack_trace.entries = ra->trace; - stack_trace.skip = 2; - save_stack_trace(&stack_trace); - ra->trace_len = stack_trace.nr_entries; + ra->trace_len = stack_trace_save(ra->trace, MAX_TRACE, 2); } static void __print_stack_trace(struct btrfs_fs_info *fs_info, struct ref_action *ra) { - struct stack_trace trace; - if (ra->trace_len == 0) { btrfs_err(fs_info, " ref-verify: no stacktrace"); return; } - trace.nr_entries = ra->trace_len; - trace.entries = ra->trace; - print_stack_trace(&trace, 2); + stack_trace_print(ra->trace, ra->trace_len, 2); } #else static void inline __save_stack_trace(struct ref_action *ra)
Replace the indirection through struct stack_trace with an invocation of the storage array based interface. Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Cc: David Sterba <dsterba@suse.com> Cc: Chris Mason <clm@fb.com> Cc: Josef Bacik <josef@toxicpanda.com> Cc: linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org --- fs/btrfs/ref-verify.c | 15 ++------------- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 13 deletions(-)