> m->from is a red herring - it's not even looked at if m->count is 0. Then, shall the initialization here be removed too? @@ -90,7 +90,7 @@ static int traverse(struct seq_file *m, loff_t offset) m->version = 0; index = 0; - m->count = m->from = 0; + m->count = 0; if (!offset) { m->index = index; return 0; > What do you think about then just abstracing out that now common sequence > of re-allocating a larger buffer, while clearing m->count? Following code is duplicated (slightly different) in both seq_read() and seq_lseek(). It would be nice to have them consolidated in traverse(). while ((err = traverse(m, *ppos)) == -EAGAIN) ; if (err) { /* With prejudice... */ m->read_pos = 0; m->version = 0; m->index = 0; m->count = 0; goto Done; } else { m->read_pos = *ppos; } Thanks, Charley -- 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