Re: [PATCH] fat: Refactor shortname parsing

[OGAWA Hirofumi <hirofumi@mail.parknet.co.jp>]

Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@inai.de> writes:

> On Tuesday 2012-07-03 13:14, Steven J. Magnani wrote:
>
>>Nearly identical shortname parsing is performed in fat_search_long()
>>and __fat_readdir(). Extract this code into a function that may be
>>called by both.
>>
>>v2: Attempt to clarify difference between vfat and msdos parsing.
>>    Remove decision-making from fat_tolower() for clarity.
>>
>>Signed-off-by: Steven J. Magnani <steve@digidescorp.com>
>>---
>>diff -uprN linux-3.5-rc4/fs/fat/dir.c new/fs/fat/dir.c
>>--- linux-3.5-rc4/fs/fat/dir.c	2012-06-29 11:20:12.766348728 -0500
>>+++ new/fs/fat/dir.c	2012-07-03 06:10:36.066283411 -0500
>>@@ -35,6 +35,11 @@
>> #define FAT_MAX_UNI_CHARS	((MSDOS_SLOTS - 1) * 13 + 1)
>> #define FAT_MAX_UNI_SIZE	(FAT_MAX_UNI_CHARS * sizeof(wchar_t))
>> 
>>+static inline unsigned char fat_tolower(unsigned char c)
>>+{
>>+	return ((c >= 'A') && (c <= 'Z')) ? c+32 : c;
>>+}
>>+
>
> The kernel already has a tolower() function, can that not be used?

tolower() is not exactly same, right? e.g. tolower(0xc0). Otherwise,
tolower() is fine.
-- 
OGAWA Hirofumi <hirofumi@mail.parknet.co.jp>