Hi, 
On Mon, May 09, 2016 at 05:22:15PM -0700, Shaohua Li wrote:
> if trace isn't enabled, parsing cgroup path just wastes cpu
> 
> Signed-off-by: Shaohua Li <s...@fb.com>
> ---
>  block/blk-throttle.c         | 5 ++---
>  include/linux/blktrace_api.h | 9 +++++++++
>  2 files changed, 11 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/block/blk-throttle.c b/block/blk-throttle.c
> index 2149a1d..47a3e54 100644
> --- a/block/blk-throttle.c
> +++ b/block/blk-throttle.c
> @@ -211,15 +211,14 @@ static struct throtl_data *sq_to_td(struct 
> throtl_service_queue *sq)
>   *
>   * The messages are prefixed with "throtl BLKG_NAME" if @sq belongs to a
>   * throtl_grp; otherwise, just "throtl".
> - *
> - * TODO: this should be made a function and name formatting should happen
> - * after testing whether blktrace is enabled.
>   */
>  #define throtl_log(sq, fmt, args...) do {                            \
>       struct throtl_grp *__tg = sq_to_tg((sq));                       \
>       struct throtl_data *__td = sq_to_td((sq));                      \
>                                                                       \
>       (void)__td;                                                     \
> +     if (likely(!blk_trace_note_message_enabled(__td->queue)))       \
> +             break;                                                  \
>       if ((__tg)) {                                                   \
>               char __pbuf[128];                                       \
>                                                                       \
> diff --git a/include/linux/blktrace_api.h b/include/linux/blktrace_api.h
> index afc1343..0f3172b 100644
> --- a/include/linux/blktrace_api.h
> +++ b/include/linux/blktrace_api.h
> @@ -57,6 +57,14 @@ void __trace_note_message(struct blk_trace *, const char 
> *fmt, ...);
>       } while (0)
>  #define BLK_TN_MAX_MSG               128
>  
> +static inline bool blk_trace_note_message_enabled(struct request_queue *q)
> +{
> +     struct blk_trace *bt = q->blk_trace;
> +     if (likely(!bt))
> +             return false;
> +     return bt->act_mask & BLK_TC_NOTIFY;
> +}
Is there any reason to skip following condition?
        if (unlikely(bt->trace_state != Blktrace_running &&
                     !blk_tracer_enabled))

Thanks,
- Simon

Reply via email to