| lists.openwall.net | lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC | |
|
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
| ||
|
Message-Id: <2CAFAD45-D715-4FFF-BFDB-A6CA30230087@primarydata.com> Date: Fri, 11 Apr 2014 19:00:52 -0400 From: Trond Myklebust <trond.myklebust@...marydata.com> To: Theodore Ts'o <tytso@....edu> Cc: linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org, rostedt@...dmis.org Subject: Re: Pretty-printing file.f_mode and file.f_flags in trace points On Apr 11, 2014, at 18:57, Theodore Ts'o <tytso@....edu> wrote: > On Fri, Apr 11, 2014 at 06:47:52PM -0400, Trond Myklebust wrote: >>> I could just cut and paste these and drop them in >>> include/trace/events/ext4.h, but it would probably be better to have a >>> common header file. The question is where to put them. Does >>> include/trace/fs.h make sense to everyone? Or should put them >>> somewhere else, such as linux/fs.h? >> >> I’d vote for creating a new file, rather than reusing >> include/linux/fs.h. The latter is included in way too many other >> headers... > > That was my preference as well. Assuming Steve is OK with > include/trace/fs.h, any objections if I carry a patch in the ext4 tree > which moves these macros from fs/nfs/nfstrace.h into that new file? That would be fine by me. Cheers Trond _________________________________ Trond Myklebust Linux NFS client maintainer, PrimaryData trond.myklebust@...marydata.com -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Powered by blists - more mailing lists