On Wed, Aug 30, 2023 at 11:38:51AM +0200, Jan Kara wrote: > On Wed 30-08-23 10:05:57, Christian Brauner wrote: > > On Wed, Aug 30, 2023 at 08:14:09AM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > > > +struct super_block *sget_dev(struct fs_context *fc, dev_t dev) > > > > > > A kerneldoc comment would probably be useful here. > > > > Added the following in-treep: > > > > diff --git a/fs/super.c b/fs/super.c > > index 158e093f23c9..19fa906b118a 100644 > > --- a/fs/super.c > > +++ b/fs/super.c > > @@ -1388,6 +1388,26 @@ static int super_s_dev_test(struct super_block *s, struct fs_context *fc) > > s->s_dev == *(dev_t *)fc->sget_key; > > } > > > > +/** > > + * sget_dev - Find or create a superblock by device number > > + * @fc: Filesystem context. > > + * @dev: device number > ^^^^^^ inconsistent indenting. Fixed, thanks! > > > + * > > + * Find or create a superblock using the provided device number that > > + * will be stored in fc->sget_key. > > + * > > + * If an extant superblock is matched, then that will be returned with > > + * an elevated reference count that the caller must transfer or discard. > > + * > > + * If no match is made, a new superblock will be allocated and basic > > + * initialisation will be performed (s_type, s_fs_info and s_id will be > > + * set and the set() callback will be invoked), the superblock will be > ^^ I guess no point in talking about set() callback when sget_dev() > has no callback specified. Rather you could mention s_dev as one of > initialized fields. Yeah, good point. Done.
