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

[Eugene Syromyatnikov]

On Sat, Mar 18, 2017 at 02:49:48PM +0530, Abhishek Tiwari wrote:
> Going with the above description for narrow statfs->
> 
> Is naming %statfs = statfs+statfs64 as TRACE_NSTATFS and shorthand as TNS fine ?

So, after some thinking, I have the following scheme in mind:

{old,}stat{,64}         TRACE_STAT              TST
{old,}lstat{,64}        TRACE_LSTAT             TLST
{old,new,}fstat{,at}64  TRACE_FSTAT             TFST
{old,new,}{,l,f}stat{,x,at}{,64}
                        TRACE_STAT_LIKE         TSTA ("stat alike")
statfs{,64}             TRACE_STATFS            TSF
fstatfs{,64}            TRACE_FSTATFS           TFSF
{,f}statfs{,64}, ustat  TRACE_STATFS_LIKE       TSFA ("statfs alike")

Calls with bsd43_/osf_/posix_/svr4_/sysv_ prefixes go to the
corresponding calls without them.

I'm not really sure about {svr4,sysv}_{,f}statvfs, but they are decoded as
printargs and looks like they should be related to {,f}statfs calls.

Does it make any sense?