From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SIGNED_OFF_BY,SPF_HELO_NONE, SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C8826C4727F for ; Mon, 28 Sep 2020 21:20:04 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7A35D2100A for ; Mon, 28 Sep 2020 21:20:04 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1726668AbgI1VUE (ORCPT ); Mon, 28 Sep 2020 17:20:04 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:47040 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726565AbgI1VUC (ORCPT ); Mon, 28 Sep 2020 17:20:02 -0400 Received: from ms.lwn.net (ms.lwn.net [IPv6:2600:3c01:e000:3a1::42]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 913D6C0613CE for ; Mon, 28 Sep 2020 14:20:02 -0700 (PDT) Received: from lwn.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ms.lwn.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id F34CB72D; Mon, 28 Sep 2020 21:20:00 +0000 (UTC) Date: Mon, 28 Sep 2020 15:19:58 -0600 From: Jonathan Corbet To: NeilBrown Cc: linux-doc@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] doc: seq_file: clarify role of *pos in ->next() Message-ID: <20200928151958.43d3822d@lwn.net> In-Reply-To: <87eemqiazh.fsf@notabene.neil.brown.name> References: <87eemqiazh.fsf@notabene.neil.brown.name> Organization: LWN.net MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-doc@vger.kernel.org On Fri, 25 Sep 2020 17:14:42 +1000 NeilBrown wrote: > There are behavioural requirements on the seq_file next() function in > terms of how it updates *pos at end-of-file, and these are now enforced > by a warning. > > I was recently attempting to justify the reason this was needed, and > couldn't remember the details, and didn't find them in the > documentation. > > So I re-read the code until I understood it again, and updated the > documentation to match. > > I also enhanced the text about SEQ_START_TOKEN as it seemed potentially > misleading. > > Cc: Vasily Averin > Signed-off-by: NeilBrown > --- > Documentation/filesystems/seq_file.rst | 20 +++++++++++++++++++- > 1 file changed, 19 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) Applied, thanks. jon