From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from zeniv.linux.org.uk ([195.92.253.2]:39944 "EHLO
        ZenIV.linux.org.uk" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
        with ESMTP id S1751488AbeAFTI4 (ORCPT
        <rfc822;linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org>);
        Sat, 6 Jan 2018 14:08:56 -0500
Date: Sat, 6 Jan 2018 19:08:53 +0000
From: Al Viro <viro@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
Cc: Avi Kivity <avi@scylladb.com>, linux-aio@kvack.org,
        linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 02/31] fs: add new vfs_poll and file_can_poll helpers
Message-ID: <20180106190853.GH21978@ZenIV.linux.org.uk>
References: <20180104080043.14506-1-hch@lst.de>
 <20180104080043.14506-3-hch@lst.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <20180104080043.14506-3-hch@lst.de>
Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-fsdevel.vger.kernel.org>

On Thu, Jan 04, 2018 at 09:00:14AM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> These abstract out calls to the poll method in preparation for changes to
> those methods.

FWIW, I would make vfs_poll()

static inline __poll_t vfs_poll(struct file *file, struct poll_table_struct *pt)
{
	if (unlikely(!file->f_op->poll))
		return DEFAULT_POLLMASK;
	return file->f_op->poll(file, pt);
}

That's safe for any struct file, some of the callers already do just that,
the ones that have vfs_poll() under the check for file_can_poll() will
simply optimize that piece away and the few that rely upon the knowledge
of file_operations they are dealing with (vhost, etc.) can bloody well
cope with the cost of the check.