lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2021]   [Nov]   [16]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 0/4] remove PDE_DATA()
On Mon,  1 Nov 2021 17:35:14 +0800 Muchun Song <songmuchun@bytedance.com> wrote:

> I found a bug [1] some days ago, which is because we want to use
> inode->i_private to pass user private data. However, this is wrong
> on proc fs. We provide a specific function PDE_DATA() to get user
> private data. Actually, we can hide this detail by storing
> PDE()->data into inode->i_private and removing PDE_DATA() completely.
> The user could use inode->i_private to get user private data just
> like debugfs does. This series is trying to remove PDE_DATA().

Why can't we do

/*
* comment goes here
*/
static inline void *PDE_DATA(struct inode *inode)
{
return inode->i_private;
}

to abstract things a bit and to reduce the patch size?

otoh, that upper-case thing needs to go, so the patch size remains the
same anyway.

And perhaps we should have a short-term

#define PDE_DATA(i) pde_data(i)

because new instances are sure to turn up during the development cycle.

But I can handle that by staging the patch series after linux-next and
reminding myself to grep for new PDE_DATA instances prior to
upstreaming.

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2021-11-16 06:10    [W:0.123 / U:0.752 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site