> > I'm ignoring seq_* failures. Which kinda scares me since it means i > > could get half of one option and half of another and the user would not > > realize it. Maybe I should build a single string for each selinux > > option and do a single seq_puts() so seq_* failure only means missing > > options, not possibly corrupted options... > > And is it even adequate to return an incomplete set of options with no > indication of truncation to userspace? How do we expect userland to use > the /proc/mounts output? seq_file deals with all that: retries with bigger buffer, or if allocation fails return ENOMEM. So userspace will never see a truncated output and callers only need to bother with their own errors. It's quite clever, really :) Miklos -- 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
