On Tue, 2012-03-20 at 12:39 -0400, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Tue, Mar 06, 2012 at 01:56:40PM +0100, Miklos Szeredi wrote: > > From: Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@xxxxxxx> > > > > Split __lookup_hash into two component functions: > > > > lookup_dcache - tries cached lookup, returns whether real lookup is needed > > lookup_real - calls i_op->lookup > > > > This eliminates code duplication between d_alloc_and_lookup() and > > d_inode_lookup(). > > The return value from lookup_dcache is a bit confusing. What about > returning the need_lookup flag, and passing the dentry as a parameter, > that way the callers would do the more obvious: > > if (lookup_dcache(name, base, nd, &dentry)) > return dentry; > > instead of having to check two conditions. > The reason I dislike your version is that returning an error value in an argument would be strange. And this works too: dentry = lookup_dcache(name, base, nd, &need_lookup); if (!need_lookup) return dentry; Thanks, 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
