[lkml]   [2005]   [Jun]   [26]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: reiser4 plugins
On Sun, Jun 26, 2005 at 09:07:00PM +0400, Artem B. Bityuckiy wrote:
> Just out of curiosity, could you please specify few exact examples with
> specific file/function names which duplicate the existing
> infrastructure. What do they duplicate and why? How should these
> functions be implemented on VFS? Ho should the the other FSes
> implement/ignore them? Why are you shure they will fit VFS well? etc.

Right now every file/inode/etc method in reiser4 is just a trivial
wrapper around a plugin call. It should instead just set the method
table directly in the plugin initialization. Example:

static int
reiser4_permission(struct inode *inode /* object */ ,
int mask, /* mode bits to check permissions
* for */
struct nameidata *nameidata)
/* reiser4_context creation/destruction removed from here,
because permission checks currently don't require this.

Permission plugin have to create context itself if necessary. */
assert("nikita-1687", inode != NULL);

return perm_chk(inode, mask, inode, mask);

besides a useless assert we just call into perm_chk, which is a macro
obsfucation to call generic_permission which would be called if
->permission was zero. A hypothetical reiser4 "plugin" that would need
redefine ->permission would just override it in a set inode_operations.
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-06-26 19:32    [W:0.401 / U:0.056 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site