[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <53B418FA.80600@1und1.de>
Date: Wed, 02 Jul 2014 16:36:42 +0200
From: Thomas Schöbel-Theuer <tst@...d1.de>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
Greg KH <gregkh@...uxfoundation.org>
CC: Thomas Schoebel-Theuer <tst@...oebel-theuer.de>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 49/50] mars: generic pre-patch for mars
> Using syscalls or syscall-like functionality from kernel code
> generally is a bad idea. Every single use needs a clear rationale in
> the patch description. Which do not seem to exist at all for the
> series, so in it's current form it'll go straight to the trash bin anyway.
Thanks, Christoph, for the explanation. I have been so long away from
the community that I don't remember all conventions / preferences any more.
Please, could you kindly advise me in the following dilemma:
Now there exists a vfs_rmdir() which I would gladly prefer in order to
avoid EXPORT_SYMBOL(sys_rmdir).
However, I probably would have to "borrow" large parts of the
sys_rmdir() implementation from fs/namei.c (the only real difference
appears to me that the pathname is not in userspace).
So, what is worse: copying relatively large pieces of code, or using
sys_rmdir()?
Thanks,
Thomas
--
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