linux-kernel - Re: move gfs2 tracepoints to inclue/trace/events dir

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, 09 Oct 2009 17:28:41 +0100
From:	Steven Whitehouse <swhiteho@...hat.com>
To:	Jason Baron <jbaron@...hat.com>
Cc:	cluster-devel@...hat.com, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: move gfs2 tracepoints to inclue/trace/events dir

Hi,

On Fri, 2009-10-09 at 12:20 -0400, Jason Baron wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 09, 2009 at 05:05:19PM +0100, Steven Whitehouse wrote:
> > Hi,
> > 
> > On Fri, 2009-10-09 at 12:01 -0400, Jason Baron wrote:
> > > hi,
> > > 
> > > I'd like to move the gfs2 tracepoints to the the common
> > > include/trace/events directory along with all of the other trace events.
> > > It makes understanding what tracepoints are available easier, and I see
> > > no reason why gfs2 should be different. For example, 'ext4.h' is already
> > > in the include/trace/events directory.
> > > 
> > > thanks,
> > > 
> > > -Jason
> > > 
> > I've no objection to that, it sounds like a good plan. Should I stick
> > this in the GFS2 tree, or would you rather keep it in the trace tree? I
> > was thinking probably the GFS2 tree would be better as it reduces the
> > chances of any future conflicts.
> 
> gfs2 tree works for me.
> 
> thanks,
> 
> -Jason
> 
Ok, done. Should be appearing shortly. Thanks,

Steve.


--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/