linux-kernel - Re: [PATCHv2 00/10] ext4: Improve FC trace events

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]

Message-ID: <20220310110553.431cc997@gandalf.local.home>
Date:   Thu, 10 Mar 2022 11:05:53 -0500
From:   Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>
To:     Ritesh Harjani <riteshh@...ux.ibm.com>
Cc:     linux-ext4@...r.kernel.org, Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>,
        "Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@....edu>,
        Harshad Shirwadkar <harshadshirwadkar@...il.com>,
        linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCHv2 00/10] ext4: Improve FC trace events

On Thu, 10 Mar 2022 21:28:54 +0530
Ritesh Harjani <riteshh@...ux.ibm.com> wrote:

> Note:- I still couldn't figure out how to expose EXT4_FC_REASON_MAX in patch-2
> which (I think) might be (only) needed by trace-cmd or perf record for trace_ext4_fc_stats.
> But it seems "cat /sys/kernel/debug/tracing/trace_pipe" gives the right output
> for ext4_fc_stats trace event (as shown below).
> 
> So with above reasoning, do you think we should take these patches in?
> And we can later see how to provide EXT4_FC_REASON_MAX definition available to
> libtraceevent?

I don't see EXT4_FC_REASON_MAX being used in the TP_printk(). If it isn't
used there, it doesn't need to be exposed. Or did I miss something?

-- Steve