Jörn Engel a écrit :
On Sat, 29 November 2008 09:44:23 +0100, Eric Dumazet wrote:
+struct dentry *d_alloc_single(const struct qstr *name, struct inode *inode)
+{
+ struct dentry *entry;
+
+ entry = d_alloc(NULL, name);
+ if (entry) {
+ entry->d_sb = inode->i_sb;
+ entry->d_parent = entry;
+ entry->d_flags |= DCACHE_SINGLE | DCACHE_DISCONNECTED;
+ entry->d_inode = inode;
+ fsnotify_d_instantiate(entry, inode);
+ security_d_instantiate(entry, inode);
+ }
+ return entry;
Calling the struct dentry entry had me onfused a bit. I believe
everyone else (including the code you removed) uses dentry.
Ah yes, it seems I took it from d_instantiate(), I guess a cleanup
patch would be nice.
@@ -918,7 +906,7 @@ struct file *create_write_pipe(int flags)
struct inode *inode;
struct file *f;
struct dentry *dentry;
- struct qstr name = { .name = "" };
+ static const struct qstr name = { .name = "" };
err = -ENFILE;
inode = get_pipe_inode();
...
@@ -371,20 +358,13 @@ static int sock_alloc_fd(struct file **filep, int flags)
static int sock_attach_fd(struct socket *sock, struct file *file, int flags)
{
struct dentry *dentry;
- struct qstr name = { .name = "" };
+ static const struct qstr name = { .name = "" };
These two could even be combined.
And of course I realize that I comment on absolute trivialities. On the
whole, I couldn't spot a real problem in your patches.
Well, at least you reviewed it, it's the important point !
Thanks Jörn
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe kernel-testers" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
