linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH] fs/proc: introduce /proc/stat2 file

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:   Mon, 29 Oct 2018 13:00:50 -0700
From:   Davidlohr Bueso <dave@...olabs.net>
To:     Waiman Long <longman@...hat.com>
Cc:     akpm@...ux-foundation.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Davidlohr Bueso <dbueso@...e.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] fs/proc: introduce /proc/stat2 file

On Mon, 29 Oct 2018, Waiman Long wrote:

>I am wondering if /proc/stat_noirqs will be a more descriptive name of
>the intent of this new procfs file or we should just go with the more
>generic stat2 name.

The reason why I went with '2' instead of a more rescriptive name
was that I think of the call as a drop-in replacement/extention to
stat. Therefore the same fields are maintained, otherwise with stat_noirqs
I feel like instead of zeroing out, they should just be removed.

But otoh, I have no strong objection in renaming either.

Thanks,
Davidlohr