Messages in this thread | | | From | Christian Brauner <> | Date | Thu, 5 Apr 2018 19:45:15 +0200 | Subject | Re: [PATCH 0/3 RESEND] namei: add follow_up_bind() |
| |
On Thu, Apr 05, 2018 at 09:28:56AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Thu, Apr 5, 2018 at 3:51 AM, Christian Brauner > <christian.brauner@ubuntu.com> wrote: > > > > This series adds: > > - follow_up_bind() to namei.{c,h} > > - switches fs/nfsd/vfs.c:follow_to_parent() to use follow_up_bind() > > - switches fs/devpts/inode.c:devpts_mntget() to use follow_up_bind() > > Hmm. Seems fair enough to me, although I wonder how much this really > helps. It does get rid of a duplicate code pattern, but: > > 4 files changed, 14 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) > > and while some of that is just the new comment, some of it is just "overhead".
Fwiw, it does get read of these while loops in two places but I personally see the biggest value in making it obvious what bind-mount resolution means.
> > It's also a bit odd how the new helper is marked "inline", but nobody > will inline it because it's not actually in the header file or any of > the isers in the same C file. So instead, it has to be exported. I > wonder if it should just be a trivial inline in <linux/namei.h>? Maybe > it originally was, and that's where the inline came from, and then > Christian decided to make it be by the regular "follow_up()" instead?
I head it inline first but it would have required to forward declare struct vfsmount in the head and I wasn't sure if that was going to fly. But I explicitly left the inline in there because I was following user_path_create() ([1], [2]) which does the same. But if that's an issue I can make it static inline in the header like I had, forward declare struct vfsmount and remove the unnecessary inline from user_path_create() in a separate patch unless there's a specific reason to leave it in there.
[1]: https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/latest/source/include/linux/namei.h#L79 [2]: https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/latest/source/fs/namei.c#L3680
> > But with all that said, I certainly don't *mind* the patch series.
Cool.
Thanks! Christian
> > Al, I'm leaving this up to you, and expect to get it from your vfs > tree eventually. Or not. > > Linus
| |