Q: statfs related syscalls (was: Re: GSOC: Introduction)

[Abhishek Tiwari]

On Sat, Mar 18, 2017 at 2:09 PM, Eugene Syromyatnikov <evgsyr at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 12:24 AM, Dmitry V. Levin <ldv at altlinux.org> wrote:
>> On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 11:14:29PM +0530, Abhishek Tiwari wrote:
>> [...]
>>> Is it fine to group statfs+ statfs64+ fstatfs + fstatfs64 + ustat  as
>>> %statfs or it should be (statfs+statfs64 + ustat) and
>>> (fstatfs+ftsatfs64) i.e. two different classes ?
>>
>> Well, I don't have a ready answer to this question.
>>
>> From one side, three narrow classes (%statfs == statfs+statfs64,
>> %fstatfs == fstatfs+fstatfs64, and ustat itself) would be a finer
>> instrument than a single wide class.  I'm not sure whether narrow statfs
>> classes will be of any practical use, though.  If we've choosen this
>> approach, we could use, say, %allstatfs as a name for the wide class.
>>
>> From another side, a single wide class is simpler to use.
>> However, once %statfs is taken for the wide class, it wouldn't be easy to
>> find a good alternative name if someday we decide to create narrow
>> classes.
>>
>> Does anybody else have an opinion on this?
>
> Since both wide and narrow syscall classes have they own use cases, it
> makes sense to support both. Dmitry has suggested %%statfs designation
> for a wide syscall class, and to me it looks like not a bad idea.
>
>>
>> --
>> ldv
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
>> engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
>> _______________________________________________
>> Strace-devel mailing list
>> Strace-devel at lists.sourceforge.net
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/strace-devel
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Eugene Syromyatnikov
> mailto:evgsyr at gmail.com
> xmpp:esyr at jabber.{ru|org}
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
> engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
> _______________________________________________
> Strace-devel mailing list
> Strace-devel at lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/strace-devel


Going with the above description for narrow statfs->

Is naming %statfs = statfs+statfs64 as TRACE_NSTATFS and shorthand as TNS fine ?