| Message ID | 1727232523-188866-1-git-send-email-liuderong@oppo.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | Changes Requested |
| Headers | show |
| Series | scsi:ufs:core: Add trace READ(16)/WRITE(16) commands | expand |
On 9/24/24 7:48 PM, liuderong@oppo.com wrote: > From: liuderong <liuderong@oppo.com> > > For sd_zbc_read_zones, READ(16)/WRITE(16) are mandatory for ZBC disks. > Currently, when printing the trace:ufshcd_command on zone UFS devices, > the LBA and SIZE fields appear invalid, > making it difficult to trace commands. > So add trace READ(16)/WRITE(16) commands for zone ufs device. > > Trace sample: > ufshcd_command: send_req: 1d84000.ufshc: tag: 31, DB: 0x0, > size: -1, IS: 0, LBA: 0, opcode: 0x8a (WRITE_16), group_id: 0x0, hwq_id: 7 > ufshcd_command: complete_rsp: 1d84000.ufshc: tag: 31, DB: 0x0, > size: -1, IS: 0, LBA: 0, opcode: 0x8a (WRITE_16), group_id: 0x0, hwq_id: 7 > > Signed-off-by: liuderong <liuderong@oppo.com> > --- > drivers/ufs/core/ufshcd.c | 8 ++++++-- > 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/ufs/core/ufshcd.c b/drivers/ufs/core/ufshcd.c > index 5e3c67e..9e5e903 100644 > --- a/drivers/ufs/core/ufshcd.c > +++ b/drivers/ufs/core/ufshcd.c > @@ -434,15 +434,19 @@ static void ufshcd_add_command_trace(struct ufs_hba *hba, unsigned int tag, > > opcode = cmd->cmnd[0]; > > - if (opcode == READ_10 || opcode == WRITE_10) { > + if (opcode == READ_10 || opcode == READ_16 || > + opcode == WRITE_10 || opcode == WRITE_16) { > /* > - * Currently we only fully trace read(10) and write(10) commands > + * Currently we only fully trace the following commands, > + * read(10),read(16),write(10), and write(16) > */ > transfer_len = > be32_to_cpu(lrbp->ucd_req_ptr->sc.exp_data_transfer_len); > lba = scsi_get_lba(cmd); > if (opcode == WRITE_10) > group_id = lrbp->cmd->cmnd[6]; > + if (opcode == WRITE_16) > + group_id = lrbp->cmd->cmnd[14]; > } else if (opcode == UNMAP) { > /* > * The number of Bytes to be unmapped beginning with the lba. To me the above patch looks like a subset of this patch from 1.5y ago: https://lore.kernel.org/linux-scsi/20230215190448.1687786-1-jaegeuk@kernel.org/ Bart.
> On 9/24/24 7:48 PM, liuderong@oppo.com wrote: >> From: liuderong <liuderong@oppo.com> >> >> For sd_zbc_read_zones, READ(16)/WRITE(16) are mandatory for ZBC disks. >> Currently, when printing the trace:ufshcd_command on zone UFS devices, >> the LBA and SIZE fields appear invalid, >> making it difficult to trace commands. >> So add trace READ(16)/WRITE(16) commands for zone ufs device. >> >> Trace sample: >> ufshcd_command: send_req: 1d84000.ufshc: tag: 31, DB: 0x0, >> size: -1, IS: 0, LBA: 0, opcode: 0x8a (WRITE_16), group_id: 0x0, >> hwq_id: 7 >> ufshcd_command: complete_rsp: 1d84000.ufshc: tag: 31, DB: 0x0, >> size: -1, IS: 0, LBA: 0, opcode: 0x8a (WRITE_16), group_id: 0x0, >> hwq_id: 7 >> >> Signed-off-by: liuderong <liuderong@oppo.com> >> --- >> drivers/ufs/core/ufshcd.c | 8 ++++++-- >> 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) >> >> diff --git a/drivers/ufs/core/ufshcd.c b/drivers/ufs/core/ufshcd.c >> index 5e3c67e..9e5e903 100644 >> --- a/drivers/ufs/core/ufshcd.c >> +++ b/drivers/ufs/core/ufshcd.c >> @@ -434,15 +434,19 @@ static void ufshcd_add_command_trace(struct >> ufs_hba *hba, unsigned int tag, >> opcode = cmd->cmnd[0]; >> - if (opcode == READ_10 || opcode == WRITE_10) { >> + if (opcode == READ_10 || opcode == READ_16 || >> + opcode == WRITE_10 || opcode == WRITE_16) { >> /* >> - * Currently we only fully trace read(10) and write(10) >> commands >> + * Currently we only fully trace the following commands, >> + * read(10),read(16),write(10), and write(16) >> */ >> transfer_len = >> be32_to_cpu(lrbp->ucd_req_ptr->sc.exp_data_transfer_len); >> lba = scsi_get_lba(cmd); >> if (opcode == WRITE_10) >> group_id = lrbp->cmd->cmnd[6]; >> + if (opcode == WRITE_16) >> + group_id = lrbp->cmd->cmnd[14]; >> } else if (opcode == UNMAP) { >> /* >> * The number of Bytes to be unmapped beginning with the lba. > > To me the above patch looks like a subset of this patch from 1.5y ago: > https://lore.kernel.org/linux-scsi/20230215190448.1687786-1-jaegeuk@kernel.org/ > > > Bart. Hi Bart， OK, do we have plan to remove the trace: ufshcd_command? I think if we want to observe info closest to the ufs device(such as ufs io latency), the ufshcd trace is more appropriate. What do you think? Thanks， Derong
diff --git a/drivers/ufs/core/ufshcd.c b/drivers/ufs/core/ufshcd.c index 5e3c67e..9e5e903 100644 --- a/drivers/ufs/core/ufshcd.c +++ b/drivers/ufs/core/ufshcd.c @@ -434,15 +434,19 @@ static void ufshcd_add_command_trace(struct ufs_hba *hba, unsigned int tag, opcode = cmd->cmnd[0]; - if (opcode == READ_10 || opcode == WRITE_10) { + if (opcode == READ_10 || opcode == READ_16 || + opcode == WRITE_10 || opcode == WRITE_16) { /* - * Currently we only fully trace read(10) and write(10) commands + * Currently we only fully trace the following commands, + * read(10),read(16),write(10), and write(16) */ transfer_len = be32_to_cpu(lrbp->ucd_req_ptr->sc.exp_data_transfer_len); lba = scsi_get_lba(cmd); if (opcode == WRITE_10) group_id = lrbp->cmd->cmnd[6]; + if (opcode == WRITE_16) + group_id = lrbp->cmd->cmnd[14]; } else if (opcode == UNMAP) { /* * The number of Bytes to be unmapped beginning with the lba.