Re: fcntl method for file_operations

[Trond Myklebust <trond.myklebust@fys.uio.no>]

På to , 25/03/2004 klokka 14:35, skreiv Matthew Wilcox:

> I don't think we should have an fcntl() method.  I'd rather see a typed
> set of method calls for whatever set of routines are actually useful.
> Something along the lines of ethtool_ops, say ;-)
> 
> perhaps the right thing to do is just to add the following ops to
> file_operations:
> 
> 	int (*fcntl_setfl)(int fd, struct file *filp, unsigned long arg);
> 	int (*fcntl_getlease)(struct file *filp);
> 	int (*fcntl_setlease)(int fd, struct file *filp, unsigned long arg);
> 	int (*fcntl_dirnotify(int fd, struct file *filp, unsigned long arg);
> 
> comments?

This was what we first proposed (actually, just the fcntl_setfl() call),
but akpm prefers the fcntl() method.

I can see his point: fcntl() is second only to ioctl() when it comes to
interface design. If you want to provide methods/callbacks for each and
every overloaded subcase, then your "struct file_operations" can quickly
turn ugly.

Cheers,
  Trond
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html