From: Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>
To: Laura Abbott <labbott@redhat.com>
Cc: David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>,
Jeremi Piotrowski <jeremi.piotrowski@gmail.com>,
Linux FS Devel <linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@linux-foundation.org>,
Phillip Lougher <phillip@squashfs.org.uk>,
linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Ilya Dryomov <idryomov@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] vfs: Handle file systems without ->parse_params better
Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2019 21:47:24 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20191212214724.GL4203@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20191212213604.19525-1-labbott@redhat.com>
On Thu, Dec 12, 2019 at 04:36:04PM -0500, Laura Abbott wrote:
> @@ -141,14 +191,19 @@ int vfs_parse_fs_param(struct fs_context *fc, struct fs_parameter *param)
> */
> return ret;
>
> - if (fc->ops->parse_param) {
> - ret = fc->ops->parse_param(fc, param);
> - if (ret != -ENOPARAM)
> - return ret;
> - }
> + parse_param = fc->ops->parse_param;
> + if (!parse_param)
> + parse_param = fs_generic_parse_param;
> +
> + ret = parse_param(fc, param);
> + if (ret != -ENOPARAM)
> + return ret;
>
> - /* If the filesystem doesn't take any arguments, give it the
> - * default handling of source.
> + /*
> + * File systems may have a ->parse_param function but rely on
> + * the top level to parse the source function. File systems
> + * may have their own source parsing though so this needs
> + * to come after the call to parse_param above.
> */
> if (strcmp(param->key, "source") == 0) {
> if (param->type != fs_value_is_string)
> --
> 2.21.0
No. Please, get rid of the boilerplate. About 80% of that thing
is an absolutely pointless dance around "but we need that to call
fs_parse()". We do *NOT* need to call fs_parse() here. We do
not need a struct fs_parameter_description instance. We do not
need struct fs_parameter_spec instances. We do not need a magical
global constant. And I'm not entirely convinced that we need
to make fs_generic_parse_param() default - filesystems that
want this behaviour can easily ask for it. A sane default is
to reject any bogus options.
I would call it ignore_unknowns_parse_param(), while we are at it.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2019-12-12 21:47 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2019-12-12 21:36 [PATCH] vfs: Handle file systems without ->parse_params better Laura Abbott
2019-12-12 21:47 ` Al Viro [this message]
2019-12-12 22:32 ` Laura Abbott
2019-12-21 18:36 ` kbuild test robot
2019-12-21 18:36 ` kbuild test robot
2019-12-21 18:36 ` [RFC PATCH] vfs: generic_fs_parameters can be static kbuild test robot
2019-12-21 18:36 ` kbuild test robot
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20191212214724.GL4203@ZenIV.linux.org.uk \
--to=viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk \
--cc=dhowells@redhat.com \
--cc=idryomov@gmail.com \
--cc=jeremi.piotrowski@gmail.com \
--cc=labbott@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=phillip@squashfs.org.uk \
--cc=torvalds@linux-foundation.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.