On Thu, 21 Aug 2025 09:13:52 +0100
Vincent Donnefort <vdonnef...@google.com> wrote:
> @@ -400,7 +436,9 @@ static int trace_remote_init_tracefs(const char *name,
> struct trace_remote *remo
> !trace_create_file("buffer_size_kb", TRACEFS_MODE_WRITE, remote_d,
> remote,
> &buffer_size_kb_fops) ||
> !trace_create_file("trace_pipe", TRACEFS_MODE_READ, remote_d,
> remote,
> - &trace_pipe_fops))
> + &trace_pipe_fops) ||
> + !trace_create_file("trace", 0200, remote_d, remote,
> + &trace_fops))
> goto err;
>
> percpu_d = tracefs_create_dir("per_cpu", remote_d);
> @@ -422,7 +460,9 @@ static int trace_remote_init_tracefs(const char *name,
> struct trace_remote *remo
> }
>
> if (!trace_create_cpu_file("trace_pipe", TRACEFS_MODE_READ,
> cpu_d, remote, cpu,
> - &trace_pipe_fops))
> + &trace_pipe_fops) ||
> + !trace_create_cpu_file("trace", 0200, cpu_d, remote, cpu,
> + &trace_fops))
> goto err;
> }
I wonder if we should name the file "reset" to not be confusing to users
when they cat the file and it doesn't produce any output.
-- Steve
