Re: [PATCH 6/8] simplefs: add file creation functions

Greg Kroah-Hartman <[email protected]>
Newsgroups org.kernel.vger.autofs,dev.linux.lists.ocfs2-devel,org.freedesktop.lists.dri-devel,org.kvack.linux-mm,org.ozlabs.lists.linuxppc-dev
Message-ID <[email protected]>
On Mon, Apr 20, 2020 at 03:57:48PM +0200, Emanuele Giuseppe Esposito wrote:
> 
> 
> On 4/14/20 2:56 PM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
> > On Tue, Apr 14, 2020 at 02:43:00PM +0200, Emanuele Giuseppe Esposito wrote:
> > > A bunch of code is duplicated between debugfs and tracefs, unify it to the
> > > simplefs library.
> > > 
> > > The code is very similar, except that dentry and inode creation are unified
> > > into a single function (unlike start_creating in debugfs and tracefs, which
> > > only takes care of dentries).  This adds an output parameter to the creation
> > > functions, but pushes all error recovery into fs/simplefs.c.
> > > 
> > > Signed-off-by: Emanuele Giuseppe Esposito <[email protected]>
> > > ---
> > >   fs/simplefs.c            | 150 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > >   include/linux/simplefs.h |  19 +++++
> > >   2 files changed, 169 insertions(+)
> > 
> > What's wrong with libfs, isn't that supposed to be for these types of
> > "common" filesystem interactions?
> > 
> > Why create a whole "new" fs for this?
> 
> I assume you meant a new file. These new functions are used only by a few
> filesystems, and I didn't want to include them in vmlinux unconditionally,
> so I introduced simplefs.c and CONFIG_SIMPLEFS instead of extending libfs.c.
> In this way only fs that need this code like debugfs and tracefs will load
> it.

Nothing "loads it", why not just make these libfs functions instead?  As
the difference between the two is not obvious at all, please don't make
things confusing.

thanks,

greg k-h
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.