Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sat, 31 Aug 2013 15:49:31 -0700 | Subject | Re: [PATCH v7 1/4] spinlock: A new lockref structure for lockless update of refcount | From | Linus Torvalds <> |
| |
On Sat, Aug 31, 2013 at 2:23 PM, Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk> wrote: > > Hmm... OK, most of these suckers are actually doing just one component; > we can look into 'print the ancestors as well' later, but the minimal > variant would be something like this and it already covers a lot of those > guys. Comments?
Doesn't look wrong, but remember the /proc debugging thing? We definitely wanted more than just one pathname component, and I don't think that's completely rare.
So I think it would be better to prepare for that, and simply print to a local buffer, and then use the "string()" function on the end result. Rather than do it directly from the dentry like you do, and then having to do that widen() thing because you couldn't do the strnlen() that that code wanted..
Hmm?
Linus
| |