[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20200917171826.GA8198@lst.de>
Date: Thu, 17 Sep 2020 19:18:26 +0200
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>
To: Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@....de>,
Richard Henderson <rth@...ddle.net>,
Ivan Kokshaysky <ink@...assic.park.msu.ru>,
Matt Turner <mattst88@...il.com>,
Trond Myklebust <trond.myklebust@...merspace.com>,
Anna Schumaker <anna.schumaker@...app.com>,
linux-alpha@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org, linux-nfs@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/5] fs,nfs: lift compat nfs4 mount data handling into
the nfs code
On Thu, Sep 17, 2020 at 06:16:04PM +0100, Al Viro wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 17, 2020 at 10:22:33AM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > There is no reason the generic fs code should bother with NFS specific
> > binary mount data - lift the conversion into nfs4_parse_monolithic
> > instead.
>
> Considering the size of struct compat_nfs4_mount_data_v1... Do we really
> need to bother with that "copy in place, so we go through the fields
> backwards" logics? Just make that
>
> > +static void nfs4_compat_mount_data_conv(struct nfs4_mount_data *data)
> > +{
> struct compat_nfs4_mount_data_v1 compat;
> compat = *(struct compat_nfs4_mount_data_v1 *)data;
> and copy the damnt thing without worrying about the field order...
Maybe. But then again why bother? I just sticked to the existing
code as much as possible.
Powered by blists - more mailing lists