From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752556AbaFYAlJ (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 Jun 2014 20:41:09 -0400 Received: from mga14.intel.com ([192.55.52.115]:2263 "EHLO mga14.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751479AbaFYAlH (ORCPT ); Tue, 24 Jun 2014 20:41:07 -0400 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.97,862,1389772800"; d="scan'208";a="357138513" Message-ID: <53AA1A9F.8030108@linux.intel.com> Date: Wed, 25 Jun 2014 08:41:03 +0800 From: "Zhang, Yanmin" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Liu hua , "Luck, Tony" , "anton@enomsg.org" , "ccross@android.com" , "keescook@chromium.org" , "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" CC: Wang Nan , "peifeiyue@huawei.com" , Liu ShuoX Subject: Re: Should Pstore(ramoops) records customized information? References: <539E6D4D.5000802@huawei.com> <53A164DB.1020305@huawei.com> <3908561D78D1C84285E8C5FCA982C28F32838E10@ORSMSX114.amr.corp.intel.com> <53A2D5BB.5040500@huawei.com> <3908561D78D1C84285E8C5FCA982C28F3283A5E3@ORSMSX114.amr.corp.intel.com> <53A41125.4080802@huawei.com> In-Reply-To: <53A41125.4080802@huawei.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 2014/6/20 18:47, Liu hua wrote: > On 2014/6/20 7:42, Luck, Tony wrote: > >>> BTW, I note that "extern struct pstore_info *psinfo" locates in >>> fs/pstore/internal.h. So users out of directory "fs/pstore/" can not use pstore to >>> record messages. We do not want other kernel users to use pstore, right? And can we >>> break this? >> Yes we can make some interface visible to the rest of the kernel ... probably >> not the raw "*psinfo" though. Perhaps the pstore_alloc_ring_buffer() and >> pstore_write_ring_buffer() functions should be the ones exported to the >> rest of the kernel. >> >>> ditoo.. Since other backends like efi and erst may can not privide such ring buffer. >>> So pstore_alloc_ring_buffer should be a funciton pointer of pstore_info struct. >> Yes - that allows less capable backend like ERST and efivars to not provide the >> service. Since it becomes internal, you can drop the "pstore_" prefix. E.g. >> something like: >> >> int pstore_alloc_ring_buffer(char *name, int size) >> { >> return psinfo->alloc_ring_buffer(name, size); >> } >> EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(pstore_alloc_ring_buffer); >> >> ... and you have to find/make some global header for the "extern" declaration. > I will make these RFC patch series according to our discussion. Thanks you very to > valuable advice. Sorry for seeing your email late.We already worked out some patches to restructure pstore. Would you like to try patchset http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.kernel/1697680/? We have more patches available to add some flags to disable/enable specific zones. Yanmin