Re: [RFC v3 1/5] cleanup: Fix discarded const warning when defining lock guard

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]


Christian Brauner <brauner@xxxxxxxxxx> writes:

> So something like this? (Amir?)
> -DEFINE_LOCK_GUARD_1(cred, const struct cred, _T->lock = override_creds_light(_T->lock),
> -	     revert_creds_light(_T->lock));
> +DEFINE_LOCK_GUARD_1(cred, struct cred,
> +		    _T->lock = (struct cred *)override_creds_light(_T->lock),
> +		    revert_creds_light(_T->lock));
> +
> +#define cred_guard(_cred) guard(cred)(((struct cred *)_cred))
> +#define cred_scoped_guard(_cred) scoped_guard(cred, ((struct cred *)_cred))
>  /**
>   * get_new_cred_many - Get references on a new set of credentials

Thinking about proposing a PATCH version (with these suggestions applied), Amir
has suggested in the past that I should propose two separate series:
 (1) introducing the guard helpers + backing file changes;
 (2) overlayfs changes;

Any new ideas about this? Or should I go with this plan?


[Index of Archives]     [Linux Filesystems Devel]     [Linux NFS]     [Linux NILFS]     [Linux USB Devel]     [Linux Audio Users]     [Yosemite News]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux SCSI]

  Powered by Linux