On Mon, 09 May 2022 14:01:50 -0700, Alan Previn wrote:
>
> @@ -190,11 +190,11 @@ static int guc_log_relay_release(struct inode *inode, 
> struct file *file)
>       return 0;
>  }
>
> -static const struct file_operations guc_log_relay_fops = {
> +static const struct file_operations guc_log_relay_ctl_fops = {
>       .owner = THIS_MODULE,
> -     .open = guc_log_relay_open,
> -     .write = guc_log_relay_write,
> -     .release = guc_log_relay_release,
> +     .open = guc_log_relay_ctl_open,
> +     .write = guc_log_relay_ctl_write,
> +     .release = guc_log_relay_ctl_release,
>  };
>
>  void intel_guc_log_debugfs_register(struct intel_guc_log *log,
> @@ -204,7 +204,7 @@ void intel_guc_log_debugfs_register(struct intel_guc_log 
> *log,
>               { "guc_log_dump", &guc_log_dump_fops, NULL },
>               { "guc_load_err_log_dump", &guc_load_err_log_dump_fops, NULL },
>               { "guc_log_level", &guc_log_level_fops, NULL },
> -             { "guc_log_relay", &guc_log_relay_fops, NULL },
> +             { "guc_log_relay_ctl", &guc_log_relay_ctl_fops, NULL },

Even though debugfs, any issue with changing the file name from the uapi
point of view? Any scripts etc. which will need to be updated?

>               { "guc_log_relay_buf_size", &guc_log_relay_buf_size_fops, NULL 
> },
>               { "guc_log_relay_subbuf_count", 
> &guc_log_relay_subbuf_count_fops, NULL },
>       };

Reply via email to