On 2015-04-17 09:04, Beata Michalska wrote:
On 04/17/2015 01:31 PM, Jan Kara wrote:On Wed 15-04-15 09:15:44, Beata Michalska wrote: ...+static const match_table_t fs_etypes = { + { FS_EVENT_INFO, "info" }, + { FS_EVENT_WARN, "warn" }, + { FS_EVENT_THRESH, "thr" }, + { FS_EVENT_ERR, "err" }, + { 0, NULL }, +};Why are there these generic message types? Threshold messages make good sense to me. But not so much the rest. If they don't have a clear meaning, it will be a mess. So I also agree with a message like - "filesystem has trouble, you should probably unmount and run fsck" - that's fine. But generic "info" or "warning" doesn't really carry any meaning on its own and thus seems pretty useless to me. To explain a bit more, AFAIU this shouldn't be a generic logging interface where something like severity makes sense but rather a relatively specific interface notifying about events in filesystem userspace should know about so I expect relatively low number of types of events, not tens or even hundreds... HonzaGetting rid of those would simplify the configuration part, indeed. So we would be left with 'generic' and threshold events. I guess I've overdone this part.
For some filesystems, it may make sense to differentiate between a generic warning and an error. For BTRFS and ZFS for example, if there is a csum error on a block, this will get automatically corrected in many configurations, and won't require anything like fsck to be run, but monitoring applications will still probably want to be notified.
Attachment:
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
