On Sat, Aug 25, 2012 at 06:55:04PM +0100, Al Viro wrote:
> > Well, this could be simplified indeed, if I understand you correctly
> > you propose just save f_mode in flexible array and use it instead
> > of struct file, right? (which will require to rewrite code a bit)
>
> Yes. FWIW, proc_fill_cache() is really atrocious ;-/ Not to mention
OK, thanks. I'm putting this cleanup task in my big todo list. Hope I'll
manage on the next week with it.
> anything else, if we ever get a negative dentry there, we have a dentry
> leak. I don't think it's possible in practice, but... Furthermore,
could you please elaborate, you mean this string?
struct dentry *child, *dir = filp->f_path.dentry;
> if (!child || IS_ERR(child) || !child->d_inode)
> goto end_instantiate;
this could be IS_ERR_OR_NULL i guess
> inode = child->d_inode;
> if (inode) {
> ino = inode->i_ino;
> type = inode->i_mode >> 12;
> }
> dput(child);
> looks really weird - how can we possibly get !inode when we'd just
> checked that child->inode is non-NULL? Moreover, that find_inode_number()
> a bit below is also as weird as it gets - in effect, we repeat
> d_lookup() we'd just done earlier. How *can* it get us anything?
to be fair -- I don't know ;) I mean I didn't invent this function
but it definitely could be cleaned up. That was partly a reason
why I've moved fd related code to fd.c|h (base.c is really big
in content already and it's always a problem at least for me to
follow big "c" files).
I can try to clean this code up, but not in this patch series,
just to not mess the series even more.
Cyrill
--
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
