From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Michael Thompson" Subject: Re: [PATCH 6/13: eCryptfs] Superblock operations Date: Thu, 4 May 2006 09:02:49 -0500 Message-ID: References: <20060504031755.GA28257@hellewell.homeip.net> <20060504033829.GE28613@hellewell.homeip.net> <20060504095552.GC5844@ucw.cz> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Cc: "Phillip Hellewell" , "Andrew Morton" , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, viro@ftp.linux.org.uk, mike@halcrow.us, mhalcrow@us.ibm.com, mcthomps@us.ibm.com, toml@us.ibm.com, yoder1@us.ibm.com, "James Morris" , "Stephen C. Tweedie" , "Erez Zadok" , "David Howells" Return-path: To: "Pavel Machek" In-Reply-To: <20060504095552.GC5844@ucw.cz> Content-Disposition: inline Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-fsdevel.vger.kernel.org On 5/4/06, Pavel Machek wrote: > HI! > > > +/** > > + * Get the filesystem statistics. Currently, we let this pass right through > > + * to the lower filesystem and take no action ourselves. > > + */ > > +static int ecryptfs_statfs(struct super_block *sb, struct kstatfs *buf) > > +{ > > + int rc = 0; > > + > > + ecryptfs_printk(KERN_DEBUG, "Enter\n"); > > + rc = vfs_statfs(ECRYPTFS_SUPERBLOCK_TO_LOWER(sb), buf); > > + ecryptfs_printk(KERN_DEBUG, "Exit; rc = [%d]\n", rc); > > + return rc; > > +} > > This is ugly. Could you remove the debugging, or at least use dprintk? How would dprintk differ from the current approach with ecryptfs_printk? -- Michael C. Thompson Software-Engineer, IBM LTC Security