From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Robert P. J. Day" Subject: for seq_file.c, EXPORT seq_path_root() and seq_dentry()? Date: Mon, 10 Aug 2009 10:24:45 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII To: linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org Return-path: Received: from astoria.ccjclearline.com ([64.235.106.9]:35187 "EHLO astoria.ccjclearline.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752358AbZHJO1b (ORCPT ); Mon, 10 Aug 2009 10:27:31 -0400 Received: from cpe002129687b04-cm001225dbafb6.cpe.net.cable.rogers.com ([99.235.241.187] helo=crashcourse.ca) by astoria.ccjclearline.com with esmtpsa (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1MaVqV-00042J-5B for linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org; Mon, 10 Aug 2009 10:27:31 -0400 Sender: linux-fsdevel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: in the process of writing a newbie article on how to use the seq_file implementation of proc files, and i noticed that, in fs/seq_file.c, mangle_path() is EXPORTed, as is seq_path(), but neither of seq_path_root() or seq_dentry(). that just seems slightly inconsistent. is there any value (or obvious drawback) to EXPORTing those other two? rday p.s. LDD3 writes of seq_path(): "It is unlikely to be used in device drivers: we have included it here for completeness." it is invoked exactly once in the source tree, in drivers/md/md.c. just an observation. -- ======================================================================== Robert P. J. Day Waterloo, Ontario, CANADA Linux Consulting, Training and Annoying Kernel Pedantry. Web page: http://crashcourse.ca Twitter: http://twitter.com/rpjday ========================================================================