On 10.03.19 г. 5:08 ч., Anand Jain wrote:
>
> I agree we need btrfs specific performance measurements and its
> my list too.
>
> However my idea was to add it as a btrfs-progs subcommand such as
>
> btrfs inspect perf ...
>
> And implement by using the systemtap/perf/bpf/dtrace, as these
> can tap the kernel functions from the useland using which we
> can measure the time taken and no kernel changes will be required.
> But yes we need to update the btrfs-progs if we rename the kernel
> function, which I think is ok.
>
> I was too early trying this with bpf before, probably there are
> more tools now to do that same thing.
This is way too developer oriented to be included in the generic btrfs
tools. Frankly bpf makes sense but only as a separate script being
developed and possibly shared on github or whatnot so that other
interested people can use it. However, integrating with btrfs-progs
definitely seems the wrong thing to do.
On the same note - I'm highly against this patchset landing in the kernel.
