On Tue, 13 Aug 2019, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 12, 2019 at 12:32:49PM -0700, Mark Salyzyn wrote:
> > --- a/include/linux/xattr.h
> > +++ b/include/linux/xattr.h
> > @@ -30,10 +30,10 @@ struct xattr_handler {
> > const char *prefix;
> > int flags; /* fs private flags */
> > bool (*list)(struct dentry *dentry);
> > - int (*get)(const struct xattr_handler *, struct dentry *dentry,
> > + int (*get)(const struct xattr_handler *handler, struct dentry *dentry,
> > struct inode *inode, const char *name, void *buffer,
> > - size_t size);
> > - int (*set)(const struct xattr_handler *, struct dentry *dentry,
> > + size_t size, int flags);
> > + int (*set)(const struct xattr_handler *handler, struct dentry *dentry,
> > struct inode *inode, const char *name, const void *buffer,
> > size_t size, int flags);
>
> Wow, 7 arguments. Isn't there some nice rule of thumb that says once
> you get more then 5, a function becomes impossible to understand?
>
> Surely this could be a structure passed in here somehow, that way when
> you add the 8th argument in the future, you don't have to change
> everything yet again? :)
>
> I don't have anything concrete to offer as a replacement fix for this,
> but to me this just feels really wrong...
How about something like:
struct xattr_gs_args {
struct dentry *dentry;
struct inode *inode;
const char *name;
const void *buffer;
size_t size;
int flags;
};
int (*get)(const struct xattr_handler *handler, struct xattr_gs_args *args);
int (*set)(const struct xattr_handler *handler, struct xattr_gs_args *args);
--
James Morris
<jmorris@xxxxxxxxx>
