From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: ebiederm@xmission.com (Eric W. Biederman)
Subject: Re: [PATCH] seq_file: Allow private data to be supplied on seq_open
Date: Wed, 06 Aug 2014 18:03:32 -0700
Message-ID: <87d2cdp0uz.fsf@x220.int.ebiederm.org>
References: <1406655593-12626-1-git-send-email-rob.jones@codethink.co.uk>
	<20140806160259.GR18016@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
	<53E254F1.30605@codethink.co.uk>
	<20140806195312.GS18016@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Cc: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@lists.codethink.co.uk,
	ian.molton@codethink.co.uk, Al Viro <viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
To: Rob Jones <rob.jones@codethink.co.uk>
Return-path: <linux-doc-owner@vger.kernel.org>
In-Reply-To: <20140806195312.GS18016@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> (Al Viro's message of
	"Wed, 6 Aug 2014 20:53:12 +0100")
Sender: linux-doc-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-Id: linux-fsdevel.vger.kernel.org

Al Viro <viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk> writes:

> On Wed, Aug 06, 2014 at 05:16:49PM +0100, Rob Jones wrote:
>
>> I'm not quite sure I understand your meaning when you say "via seq_open"
>> though, that function call format needs to stay the same or lots of
>> code will break, so I can't just add the third parameter on the end.
>> (C++ does have *some* advantages!) Can you clarify, please?
>
> seq_open_private() can be implemented as call of seq_open() +
> assignment...

This is why I object to the name seq_open_priv() for the new code.
seq_open_private() is already implemented and base on seq_open().

And the names are close enough together it is confusing :(

Eric