From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1030852AbXDPQZe (ORCPT ); Mon, 16 Apr 2007 12:25:34 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1030856AbXDPQZd (ORCPT ); Mon, 16 Apr 2007 12:25:33 -0400 Received: from palinux.external.hp.com ([192.25.206.14]:42623 "EHLO mail.parisc-linux.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1030851AbXDPQZc (ORCPT ); Mon, 16 Apr 2007 12:25:32 -0400 Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2007 10:25:30 -0600 From: Matthew Wilcox To: Andreas Gruenbacher Cc: Christoph Hellwig , jjohansen@suse.de, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-security-module@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, chrisw@sous-sol.org, Tony Jones Subject: Re: [nameidata 1/2] Don't pass NULL nameidata to vfs_create Message-ID: <20070416162530.GA12207@parisc-linux.org> References: <20070412090809.917795000@suse.de> <20070412090836.207973000@suse.de> <20070412100628.GA25078@infradead.org> <200704161811.30364.agruen@suse.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200704161811.30364.agruen@suse.de> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.13 (2006-08-11) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Apr 16, 2007 at 06:11:30PM +0200, Andreas Gruenbacher wrote: > +static inline int > +nfsd_do_create(struct inode *dir, struct dentry *child, struct vfsmount *mnt, > + int mode) > +{ > + struct nameidata nd = { > + .dentry = child, > + .mnt = mnt, > + }; > + > + return vfs_create(dir, child, mode, &nd); > +} > + Wouldn't it normally result in fewer instructions (on most architectures ... maybe not x86) to keep the same argument order as vfs_create? ie: static inline int nfsd_do_create(struct inode *dir, struct dentry *child, int mode, struct vfsmount *mnt)