[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAF7b7moWAVAL-_=ZyN-cCvHePxaf15bstQ+-5VzSdpDW=3Gh2Q@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 20 May 2025 11:16:59 -0700
From: Anish Moorthy <amoorthy@...gle.com>
To: Carlos Llamas <cmllamas@...gle.com>
Cc: linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Christian Brauner <brauner@...nel.org>,
Alexander Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Rename get_unused_fd_flags to get_unused_fd
On Sun, May 18, 2025 at 1:43 PM Carlos Llamas <cmllamas@...gle.com> wrote:
>
> I don't understand the "unused flags" argument. Did you interpret the
> current naming as "get the flags not used by a certain fd"?
Right
> If it helps, this kind of patches are usually tagged as "treewide:" and
> are often implemented using coccinelle scripts.
Oh neat, I had no idea about conccinelle: thanks for cluing me in
> Also, for this patch in particular I would:
> Cc: Al Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>
> Cc: Christian Brauner <brauner@...nel.org>
>
> > diff --git a/drivers/android/binder.c b/drivers/android/binder.c
> > index 76052006bd87..e162d92e8c1d 100644
> > --- a/drivers/android/binder.c
> > +++ b/drivers/android/binder.c
> > @@ -4618,7 +4618,7 @@ static int binder_apply_fd_fixups(struct binder_proc *proc,
> > int ret = 0;
> >
> > list_for_each_entry(fixup, &t->fd_fixups, fixup_entry) {
> > - int fd = get_unused_fd_flags(O_CLOEXEC);
> > + int fd = get_unused_fd(O_CLOEXEC);
> >
> > if (fd < 0) {
> > binder_debug(BINDER_DEBUG_TRANSACTION,
>
> This is the only reason I found this patch (binder), and fwiw the
> renaming looks OK to me.
>
> Cheers,
> Carlos Llamas
Powered by blists - more mailing lists