From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6B344C433EF for ; Wed, 6 Jul 2022 16:34:44 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S233628AbiGFQem (ORCPT ); Wed, 6 Jul 2022 12:34:42 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:59720 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S232969AbiGFQek (ORCPT ); Wed, 6 Jul 2022 12:34:40 -0400 Received: from verein.lst.de (verein.lst.de [213.95.11.211]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1121C1581C for ; Wed, 6 Jul 2022 09:34:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: by verein.lst.de (Postfix, from userid 2407) id ABB1E68BEB; Wed, 6 Jul 2022 18:34:34 +0200 (CEST) Date: Wed, 6 Jul 2022 18:34:34 +0200 From: Christoph Hellwig To: Keith Busch Cc: Christoph Hellwig , John Garry , axboe@fb.com, sagi@grimberg.me, linux-nvme@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] nvme: Fix nvme_setup_command metadata trace event for cdw10 Message-ID: <20220706163434.GA2222@lst.de> References: <1657095398-114310-1-git-send-email-john.garry@huawei.com> <20220706161825.GA1962@lst.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17 (2007-11-01) Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Wed, Jul 06, 2022 at 10:26:09AM -0600, Keith Busch wrote: > On Wed, Jul 06, 2022 at 06:18:25PM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > On Wed, Jul 06, 2022 at 10:13:22AM -0600, Keith Busch wrote: > > > Did you test what the trace looks like afte this? We're losing valuable trace > > > data here. The field is supposed to get CDW's 10 - 15, so that's 24 bytes. I > > > don't know why it cares that the address of the field being read is only 4 > > > bytes; we want everything that comes after it too. > > > > Because accesses should not spawn boundaries of members in structs unless > > copying the entire struct. If we want to trace the various fields we > > need to individually assign them. > > > > Anyway, I'm dropping this patch from nvme-5.19 for now to let the > > discussion conclude. > > How about this instead? Maybe a better option would be to use struct_group().