On Sat, Nov 28, 2009 at 12:25:09PM +0300, Alexey Dobriyan wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 27, 2009 at 11:13:54PM -0700, Grant Grundler wrote:
> > On Fri, Nov 27, 2009 at 09:51:12AM +0300, Alexey Dobriyan wrote:
> > > Signed-off-by: Alexey Dobriyan <adobriyan@xxxxxxxxx>
> >
> > No commit comment?
>
> No, subject says it's all.
The subject line says what the patch does, not why you wrote the patch.
Your comments below are an example of what I was looking for.
>
> > > - ent = create_proc_entry("led", S_IFREG|S_IRUGO|S_IWUSR, proc_pdc_root);
> > > + ent = proc_create_data("led", S_IRUGO|S_IWUSR, proc_pdc_root,
> > > + &led_proc_fops, (void *)LED_NOLCD); /* LED */
> >
> > Documentation/filesystems/seq_file.txt says to use create_proc_entry().
> > I couldn't find any documentation on proc_create_data().
> > Is this really the preferred API?
>
> Yes, it's slightly less racy than create_proc_entry().
> create_proc_entry() is going to be removed in fact.
Ok. Please add a sentence about which race you are worried about.
This isn't to discuss the race - it's just informative to explain
why there is a plan to replace the API. I'm willing to go along with
that.
Are you removing create_proc_entry() ? Is this patch part of a grand plan?
(All good things to include in a commit comment)
Also updating Documentation/filesystems/seq_file.txt would be very
helpful given you understand why proc_create_data() should replace
create_proc_entry().
thanks!
grant
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-parisc" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
