On Thu, 14 Jan 2010 23:36:25 -0500 Andreas Dilger <adilger@xxxxxxx> wrote: > However, it is doesn't make sense to me to suggest that people add random > binary status messages to netlink at random times without any kind of > planning or coordination, since it will just result in a mishmash of > ad-hoc messages, tools, etc, that will be far worse than what we have > today instead of improving what exists in /var/log/messages today. My true purpose is to confirm time when a certain ext3 filesystem was unmounted. (We can confirm time when a certain ext3 filesystem was mounted because ext3 filesystem prints the specific messages at mount. Therefore, to add "unmount" message into ext3 satisfies my purpose. But to add the one into VFS layer is more appropriate because we can distinguish the events (mount/unmount) for other filesystems.) ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Background: I am an investigator of the root causes of my user incidents. When I investigated a user's incident, I wanted to know whether a certain mounted ext3 filesystem had been clearly unmounted or not. Because a certain problem could not occur if its filesystem had been already unmounted. But now, there is no way to know whether filesystems were unmounted after the event was done. Owing to this reason, I want some mechanisms to know whether a certain filesystem is clearly unmounted after such events was done. Therefore, I proposed the additional print mechanism in VFS layer. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- For such a purpose, I think the text message in /var/log/messages is more appropriate. Regards, Toshiyuki Okajima -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
