linux-ext4 - Re: Pretty-printing file.f_mode and file.f

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

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

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