[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20120726104929.GC26471@moon>
Date: Thu, 26 Jul 2012 14:49:29 +0400
From: Cyrill Gorcunov <gorcunov@...nvz.org>
To: Pavel Emelyanov <xemul@...allels.com>
Cc: "linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org" <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@...il.com>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
James Bottomley <jbottomley@...allels.com>,
Matthew Helsley <matt.helsley@...il.com>
Subject: Re: [patch 2/7] procfs: Convert /proc/pid/fdinfo/ handling routines
to seq-file
On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 02:43:02PM +0400, Pavel Emelyanov wrote:
> On 07/25/2012 01:47 PM, Cyrill Gorcunov wrote:
> > This patch converts /proc/pid/fdinfo/ handling routines to seq-file which
> > is needed to extend seq operations and plug in auxiliary fdinfo provides
> > from subsystems like eventfd/eventpoll/fsnotify.
> >
> > Note the proc_fd_link no longer call for proc_fd_info, simply because
> > proc_fd_info is converted to seq_fdinfo_open (which is seq-file open()
> > prototype), moreover in further patches I need to provide two seq_fdinfo_open
> > variants -- one with CONFIG_CHECKPOINT_RESTORE and one without this
> > symbol. All in one -- this will look more messy then.
>
> This is something I'm really not happy with :( After the set applied we will
> have one former proc_fd_info being splitted into 3 (three!) functions doing
> the same (with flavors).
>
> For me it's better to fix this, otherwise conversion to seq-file looks OK.
OK, thanks for review! I'll try to fix it up.
Cyrill
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists