Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 25 Sep 2014 18:39:29 +0100 | From | Rob Jones <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH RESUBMIT 1/2] fs/seq_file: Create new function seq_open_init() |
| |
On 25/09/14 15:49, Randy Dunlap wrote: > On 09/25/14 02:10, Rob Jones wrote: >> >> >> On 24/09/14 22:39, Andrew Morton wrote: >>> On Wed, 24 Sep 2014 12:15:55 +0100 Rob Jones <rob.jones@codethink.co.uk> wrote: >>> >>>> Add a new function to help reduce boilerplate code. >>>> >>>> This is a wrapper function for seq_open() that will simplify the code in a >>>> significant number of cases where seq_open() is currently called. >>>> >>>> It's first use is in __seq_open_private(), thereby recovering most of >>>> the code space used by the new function. >>> >>> It would be nice to include one or more of the conversions in this patch >>> series so we can see what the effects look like. >> >> There are certainly lots of candidates around. However, I thought that >> the change to __seq_open_private() already gave a good illustration of >> the level of savings to be made, in that it more or less made the new >> function "self financing". >> >>> >>>> --- a/fs/seq_file.c >>>> +++ b/fs/seq_file.c >>>> @@ -639,28 +639,38 @@ int seq_release_private(struct inode *inode, struct file *file) >>>> } >>>> EXPORT_SYMBOL(seq_release_private); >>>> >>>> +int seq_open_init(struct file *f, const struct seq_operations *ops, void *p) >>>> +{ >>>> + struct seq_file *s; >>>> + int rc; >>>> + >>>> + rc = seq_open(f, ops); >>>> + if (rc) >>>> + return rc; >>>> + >>>> + s = f->private_data; >>>> + s->private = p; >>>> + >>>> + return 0; >>>> +} >>>> +EXPORT_SYMBOL(seq_open_init); >>> >>> A global exported-to-modules interface should be documented, please. >>> Especially when it has a void* argument. seq_file.c is patchy - some >>> of it is documented, some of it uses the read-programmers-mind >>> approach. >> >> I have included documentation as the second patch. Would it have been >> better to include them in a single patch? I didn't do that because >> seq_file and Documentation have different maintainers. I'm still >> learning the protocols here. > > Whoever merges the fs/ changes can (should) also merge the Documentation changes.
OK, if I resubmit (which seems quite likely), I'll merge them into a single patch.
-- Rob Jones Codethink Ltd mailto:rob.jones@codethink.co.uk tel:+44 161 236 5575
| |