On Fri, Apr 20, 2012 at 02:08:37PM -0400, Theodore Ts'o wrote: > I wonder if we would be better off simply exporting dentry_path(), > perhaps as EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL, with a warning that it should only be used > for debugging purposes, or some such. I suspect it's not worth changing > all of the inode_ops interfaces to pass in a struct path intead of a > struct dentry if it's only to be used for debugging. Or maybe I should > just keep on doing these ugly things and justify them because it's only > for debugging (yelch). > > What do you think? Just use dentry_path_raw() - it _is_ exported and the only difference is the lack of //deleted for unlinked ones. -- 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
