[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20201203155203.4dd2736c@lwn.net>
Date: Thu, 3 Dec 2020 15:52:03 -0700
From: Jonathan Corbet <corbet@....net>
To: info@...ocraticnet.de
Cc: linux-doc@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Joris Gutjahr <joris.gutjahr@...tonmail.com>,
Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk>,
linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Updating the documentation of struct file_system_type
On Tue, 1 Dec 2020 22:05:51 +0100
info@...ocraticnet.de wrote:
> From: Joris Gutjahr <joris.gutjahr@...tonmail.com>
>
> In the documentation of struct file_system_type,
> using the definition of the struct of the kernel v5.10-rc6.
>
> Signed-off-by: Joris Gutjahr <joris.gutjahr@...tonmail.com>
So I applaud any effort to update this file, but I have a couple of
requests. First is that any patch like this needs to be run past the
filesystem folks; I've added Al and the fsdevel list to CC as a starting
point.
> Documentation/filesystems/vfs.rst | 28 +++++++++++++++++++++++-----
> 1 file changed, 23 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/Documentation/filesystems/vfs.rst b/Documentation/filesystems/vfs.rst
> index ca52c82e5bb5..364ef3dcb649 100644
> --- a/Documentation/filesystems/vfs.rst
> +++ b/Documentation/filesystems/vfs.rst
> @@ -107,22 +107,30 @@ file /proc/filesystems.
> struct file_system_type
> -----------------------
>
> -This describes the filesystem. As of kernel 2.6.39, the following
> -members are defined:
> +This describes the filesystem. As of kernel v5.10, the following
> +members are defined: (compare: include/linux/fs.h)
>
> .. code-block:: c
>
> - struct file_system_operations {
> + struct file_system_type {
> const char *name;
> int fs_flags;
> + int (*init_fs_context)(struct fs_context*);
> + const struct fs_parameter_spec *parameters;
> struct dentry *(*mount) (struct file_system_type *, int,
> const char *, void *);
> void (*kill_sb) (struct super_block *);
> struct module *owner;
> struct file_system_type * next;
> - struct list_head fs_supers;
> + struct hlist_head fs_supers;
> struct lock_class_key s_lock_key;
> struct lock_class_key s_umount_key;
> + struct lock_class_key s_vfs_rename_key;
> + struct lock_class_key s_writers_key[SB_FREEZE_LEVELS];
> +
> + struct lock_class_key i_lock_key;
> + struct lock_class_key i_mutex_key;
> + struct lock_class_key i_mutex_dir_key;
> };
>
> ``name``
> @@ -132,6 +140,12 @@ members are defined:
> ``fs_flags``
> various flags (i.e. FS_REQUIRES_DEV, FS_NO_DCACHE, etc.)
>
> +``init_fs_context``
> + TODO
> +
> +``fs_parameter_spec``
> + TODO
These are ... not particularly helpful. If we're going to update the
documentation for this structure, we should actually update the
documentation, methinks.
> ``mount``
> the method to call when a new instance of this filesystem should
> be mounted
> @@ -148,7 +162,11 @@ members are defined:
> ``next``
> for internal VFS use: you should initialize this to NULL
>
> - s_lock_key, s_umount_key: lockdep-specific
> +``fs_supers``
> + TODO
> +
> +
> + s_lock_key, s_umount_key, s_vfs_rename_key, s_writers_key, i_lock_key, i_mutex_key, i_mutex_dir_key: lockdep-specific
You should maintain the RST description-list formatting here.
> The mount() method has the following arguments:
Thanks,
jon
Powered by blists - more mailing lists