On 5/4/06, Pekka Enberg <penberg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Hi Phillip,
Some comments below.
On 5/4/06, Phillip Hellewell <phillip@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> +kmem_cache_t *ecryptfs_inode_info_cache;
Please use struct kmem_cache instead of the typedef.
Please explain why. Looking at the source shows that kmem_cache_t is
more widely used, and therefore seems to be the prefered way.
> + ecryptfs_printk(KERN_DEBUG, "Exit\n");
> +}
> +
> +/**
> + * Set up the ecryptfs inode.
> + */
> +static void ecryptfs_read_inode(struct inode *inode)
> +{
> + ecryptfs_printk(KERN_DEBUG, "Enter; inode = [%p]\n", inode);
> + /* This is where we setup the self-reference in the vfs_inode's
> + * u.generic_ip. That way we don't have to walk the list again. */
> + ECRYPTFS_INODE_TO_PRIVATE_SM(inode) =
> + list_entry(inode, struct ecryptfs_inode_info, vfs_inode);
> + ECRYPTFS_INODE_TO_LOWER(inode) = NULL;
Hmm, ugly, please make the setters explicit instead.
Curious, what exactly do you mean by this? I'm not sure what you mean
by "setters".
--
Michael C. Thompson <mcthomps@xxxxxxxxxx>
Software-Engineer, IBM LTC Security
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
