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.
> + *
> + * 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.
Honza
--
Jan Kara <jack@xxxxxxxx>
SUSE Labs, CR
