On Sat, Mar 22, 2014 at 11:51:54PM -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > Looks good, but shouldn't there be an abstract function to skip writing > into an XDR buf instead of the pointer increment as well? So you're talking about the earlier spot in the code where we've got a p++; /* to be filled in later? */ I'm not convinced it'd be worth it, but maybe. > I wonder if the XDR buf internal should even be entirely hidden to the > consummers and it should only be accessed through procedural interfaces? By the end of the series, most xdr encoding looks like p = xdr_reserve_space(xdr, <nbytes>); *p++ = cpu_to_be32(<some value>); p = xdr_encode_something_more_complicated(p, <some struct>); ... It doesn't require the encoders to know much about xdr_buf's. The main exception is read, especially the splice case. We could probably do better there, I just haven't thought much about it yet. Hm, but maybe what you're asking for here is just a write_bytes_to_xdr_buf wrapper that takes the xdr_stream instead of an xdr_buf, and a corresponding function to read xdr->buf->len when we want an offset? OK, maybe so. --b. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-nfs" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
