[lkml]   [2007]   [Jul]   [25]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: [RFC] fs/super.c: Why alloc_super use a static variable default_op?
    On 7/25/07, Al Viro <> wrote:
    > On Wed, Jul 25, 2007 at 11:48:35AM +0800, rae l wrote:
    > > Why alloc_super use a static variable default_op?
    > > the static struct super_operations default_op is just all zeros, and
    > > just referenced as the initial value of a new allocated super_block,
    > > what does it for?
    > So that we would not have to care about ->s_op *ever* being NULL.
    But is it valuable? Compared to a waste of sizeof(struct super_block)
    bytes memory.

    When some code want to refer fs_type->s_op, it almost always want to
    refer some function pointer in s_op with fs_type->s_op->***, but all
    pointers in default_op are all NULLs, what about this scenario?

    and if you do grep s_op in the source code, you will found nowhere
    will want to test s_op or dependent on s_op not NULL.

    So my opinion is to remove default_ops, just keep new allocated s_op NULL.


    Denis Cheng
    Linux Application Developer

    "One of my most productive days was throwing away 1000 lines of code."
    - Ken Thompson.
    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: 2007-07-25 06:31    [W:0.019 / U:38.872 seconds]
    ©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site