Messages in this thread | | | Subject | Re: [PATCH] configfs: implement binary attributes | From | Pantelis Antoniou <> | Date | Wed, 30 Dec 2015 10:51:08 +0200 |
| |
Hi Joel,
> On Dec 30, 2015, at 01:00 , Joel Becker <jlbec@evilplan.org> wrote: > > On Thu, Dec 24, 2015 at 03:51:10PM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote: >> From: Pantelis Antoniou <pantelis.antoniou@konsulko.com> >> >> ConfigFS lacked binary attributes up until now. This patch >> introduces support for binary attributes in a somewhat similar >> manner of sysfs binary attributes albeit with changes that >> fit the configfs usage model. >> >> Problems that configfs binary attributes fix are everything that >> requires a binary blob as part of the configuration of a resource, >> such as bitstream loading for FPGAs, DTBs for dynamically created >> devices etc. > > Overall, I really like this addition. >
That’s good :)
>> @@ -423,7 +429,9 @@ static int configfs_attach_attr(struct configfs_dirent * sd, struct dentry * den >> spin_unlock(&configfs_dirent_lock); >> >> error = configfs_create(dentry, (attr->ca_mode & S_IALLUGO) | S_IFREG, >> - configfs_init_file); >> + (sd->s_type & CONFIGFS_ITEM_ATTR) ? >> + configfs_init_file : >> + configfs_init_bin_file); > > BIN_ATTRs are the more uncommon type, at least for now. I would think > this code should check for special cases and fall back to ITEM_ATTR. So > reverse it. > > (sd->s_type & CONFIGFS_ITEM_BIN_ATTR) ? > configfs_init_bin_file : > configfs_init_file >
OK.
>> +static ssize_t >> +configfs_read_bin_file(struct file *file, char __user *buf, >> + size_t count, loff_t *ppos) >> +{ >> + struct configfs_buffer *buffer = file->private_data; >> + struct dentry *dentry = file->f_path.dentry; >> + struct config_item *item = to_item(dentry->d_parent); >> + struct configfs_bin_attribute *bin_attr = to_bin_attr(dentry); >> + ssize_t retval = 0; >> + ssize_t len = min_t(size_t, count, PAGE_SIZE); >> + >> + mutex_lock(&buffer->mutex); >> + >> + /* we don't support switching read/write modes */ >> + if (buffer->write_in_progress) { >> + retval = -EINVAL; >> + goto out; >> + } > > These are valid arguments, it's just competing with another operation. > Wouldn't something like EINPROGRESS or ETXTBSY make more sense and be > more informative? The same for configfs_write_bin_file(). >
Yep, will be done.
> Joel >
Regards
— Pantelis
PS. A big thanks to Christoph for keeping this going. I will shortly post a new version with the requested changes incorporated.
> -- > > "Soap and education are not as sudden as a massacre, but they are more > deadly in the long run." > - Mark Twain > > > http://www.jlbec.org/ > jlbec@evilplan.org
| |