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.
