On Fri, 30 Jul 2010 15:29:35 +0530
Suresh Jayaraman <sjayaraman@xxxxxxx> wrote:
> Based on the previous discussions and suggestion by Jeff on providing a way
> to tell about compiled kernel config options, I wrote a simple patch. It seems
> useful. But, feel free to ignore this patch if you think it is not..
>
> From: Suresh Jayaraman <sjayaraman@xxxxxxx>
> Subject: [RFC][PATCH 1/2] cifs: show enabled features in /proc
>
> Here's a simple patch to show the compiled in CIFS features. This patch adds a
> /proc file called "features" when read will show the features enabled in the
> running kernel as shown below:
>
> $cat /proc/fs/cifs/features
> # CIFS features enabled
> dfs spnego fsc
>
> This provides a definitive way to tell what features are currently enabled.
> This could be useful as a debugging information as well.
>
> Signed-off-by: Suresh Jayaraman <sjayaraman@xxxxxxx>
> Cc: Jeff Layton <jlayton@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> fs/cifs/cifs_debug.c | 36 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> 1 files changed, 36 insertions(+), 0 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/cifs/cifs_debug.c b/fs/cifs/cifs_debug.c
> index 4fce6e6..af5dbf7 100644
> --- a/fs/cifs/cifs_debug.c
> +++ b/fs/cifs/cifs_debug.c
> @@ -402,6 +402,7 @@ static const struct file_operations cifs_multiuser_mount_proc_fops;
> static const struct file_operations cifs_security_flags_proc_fops;
> static const struct file_operations cifs_experimental_proc_fops;
> static const struct file_operations cifs_linux_ext_proc_fops;
> +static const struct file_operations cifs_feat_proc_fops;
>
> void
> cifs_proc_init(void)
> @@ -428,6 +429,8 @@ cifs_proc_init(void)
> &cifs_security_flags_proc_fops);
> proc_create("LookupCacheEnabled", 0, proc_fs_cifs,
> &cifs_lookup_cache_proc_fops);
> + proc_create("features", 0, proc_fs_cifs,
> + &cifs_feat_proc_fops);
> }
>
> void
> @@ -448,6 +451,7 @@ cifs_proc_clean(void)
> remove_proc_entry("LinuxExtensionsEnabled", proc_fs_cifs);
> remove_proc_entry("Experimental", proc_fs_cifs);
> remove_proc_entry("LookupCacheEnabled", proc_fs_cifs);
> + remove_proc_entry("features", proc_fs_cifs);
> remove_proc_entry("fs/cifs", NULL);
> }
>
> @@ -791,6 +795,38 @@ static const struct file_operations cifs_security_flags_proc_fops = {
> .release = single_release,
> .write = cifs_security_flags_proc_write,
> };
> +
> +static int cifs_feat_proc_show(struct seq_file *m, void *v)
> +{
> + seq_printf(m, "# CIFS features enabled\n");
> +#ifdef CONFIG_CIFS_DFS_UPCALL
> + seq_printf(m, "dfs");
> + seq_putc(m, ' ');
> +#endif
> +#ifdef CONFIG_CIFS_UPCALL
> + seq_printf(m, "spnego");
> + seq_putc(m, ' ');
> +#endif
> +#ifdef CONFIG_CIFS_FSCACHE
> + seq_printf(m, "fsc");
> + seq_putc(m, ' ');
> +#endif
> + seq_putc(m, '\n');
> + return 0;
> +}
> +
> +static int cifs_feat_proc_open(struct inode *inode, struct file *file)
> +{
> + return single_open(file, cifs_feat_proc_show, NULL);
> +}
> +
> +static const struct file_operations cifs_feat_proc_fops = {
> + .owner = THIS_MODULE,
> + .open = cifs_feat_proc_open,
> + .read = seq_read,
> + .llseek = seq_lseek,
> + .release = single_release,
> +};
> #else
> inline void cifs_proc_init(void)
> {
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-cifs" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>
Looks good. Now that I've given this more thought though...
I wonder if this would be better done as a new line near the beginning
of /proc/fs/cifs/DebugData. Maybe:
Features: dfs spnego fsc
People often provide that info already when reporting bugs. We wouldn't
need to ask for anything new that way.
Thoughts?
--
Jeff Layton <jlayton@xxxxxxxxxx>
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-cifs" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
