From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from relay.sgi.com (relay3.corp.sgi.com [198.149.34.15]) by oss.sgi.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3CFC47F3F for ; Tue, 24 Feb 2015 07:03:53 -0600 (CST) Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda1.sgi.com [192.48.157.11]) by relay3.corp.sgi.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DE31DAC005 for ; Tue, 24 Feb 2015 05:03:49 -0800 (PST) Received: from mx1.redhat.com (mx1.redhat.com [209.132.183.28]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id 1n5wugP1kA7WcM3M (version=TLSv1 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Tue, 24 Feb 2015 05:03:48 -0800 (PST) Date: Tue, 24 Feb 2015 08:03:21 -0500 From: Brian Foster Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] xfs: log unmount events on console Message-ID: <20150224130321.GB2356@laptop.bfoster> References: <54EB7BDB.7080202@redhat.com> <54EB7C65.3000307@sandeen.net> <20150223204904.GC13522@infradead.org> <54EB9330.4080604@sandeen.net> <20150223210629.GA9370@infradead.org> <20150224115325.GA2356@laptop.bfoster> <20150224125120.GC4251@dastard> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20150224125120.GC4251@dastard> List-Id: XFS Filesystem from SGI List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com Sender: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com To: Dave Chinner Cc: Christoph Hellwig , Eric Sandeen , Eric Sandeen , xfs-oss On Tue, Feb 24, 2015 at 11:51:20PM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote: > On Tue, Feb 24, 2015 at 06:53:25AM -0500, Brian Foster wrote: > > On Mon, Feb 23, 2015 at 01:06:29PM -0800, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > > On Mon, Feb 23, 2015 at 02:53:04PM -0600, Eric Sandeen wrote: > > > > On 2/23/15 2:49 PM, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > > > > Oh well, even more spam during xfstest runs :) > > > > > > > > Heh, but no review...? > > > > > > > > I could be talked out of it, if people think it's not useful > > > > enough. > > > > > > I can't really get excited enough either way to give a review or nak.. > > > > > > > Heh, what verbosity is xfs_notice()? Maybe using debug level would be > > better? > > The context Eric and I wanted to see this was when triaging bugs on > production systems. e.g. to know if someone unmounted a shut down > filesystem and tried to repair it before rebooting the system... > I guess that makes sense on a clean reboot, less so if the shutdown is a rootfs and leads to a panic or something of that sort (and what does a umount matter once the fs is shutdown?). Anyways, it's not a common operation and if the extra xfstests logging is the most significant tradeoff then it seems harmless to me: Reviewed-by: Brian Foster > Cheers, > > Dave. > -- > Dave Chinner > david@fromorbit.com > > _______________________________________________ > xfs mailing list > xfs@oss.sgi.com > http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs