Hey, Al. On Sun, Feb 10, 2013 at 12:18:12AM +0000, Al Viro wrote: > > Andrew, can you please pick up these two patches? They were posted a > > month ago and at least nobody seems violently against them. The > > original patches are, > > Consider *any* tracepoints in that area blanketly NAKed. Sorry, I thought > I made it clear, but just in case: Heh, this is the first time I hear about it. > As far as I'm concerned, *the* *only* interface stability warranties in VFS > are those for syscalls. Which means that no tracepoints are going to be > acceptable there. End of story. I see, it's about API stability. This TP is expected to be used by internal tracer to approxmiately match generated IOs to specific files, so at least the proposed usage is inside the kernel. I suppose there's no way to mark TPs internal, Steven? Anyways, I haven't looked at the tracer code for a while, and am not sure whether the information can be acquired differently. Will take another look. Thanks. -- tejun -- 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
