Re: [PATCH RESUBMIT 1/2] fs/seq_file: Create new function seq_open_init()

[Randy Dunlap <rdunlap@infradead.org>]

On 09/25/14 02:10, Rob Jones wrote:
> 
> 
> On 24/09/14 22:39, Andrew Morton wrote:
>> On Wed, 24 Sep 2014 12:15:55 +0100 Rob Jones <rob.jones@codethink.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>>> Add a new function to help reduce boilerplate code.
>>>
>>> This is a wrapper function for seq_open() that will simplify the code in a
>>> significant number of cases where seq_open() is currently called.
>>>
>>> It's first use is in __seq_open_private(), thereby recovering most of
>>> the code space used by the new function.
>>
>> It would be nice to include one or more of the conversions in this patch
>> series so we can see what the effects look like.
> 
> There are certainly lots of candidates around. However, I thought that
> the change to __seq_open_private() already gave a good illustration of
> the level of savings to be made, in that it more or less made the new
> function "self financing".
> 
>>
>>> --- a/fs/seq_file.c
>>> +++ b/fs/seq_file.c
>>> @@ -639,28 +639,38 @@ int seq_release_private(struct inode *inode, struct file *file)
>>>   }
>>>   EXPORT_SYMBOL(seq_release_private);
>>>
>>> +int seq_open_init(struct file *f, const struct seq_operations *ops, void *p)
>>> +{
>>> +    struct seq_file *s;
>>> +    int rc;
>>> +
>>> +    rc = seq_open(f, ops);
>>> +    if (rc)
>>> +        return rc;
>>> +
>>> +    s = f->private_data;
>>> +    s->private = p;
>>> +
>>> +    return 0;
>>> +}
>>> +EXPORT_SYMBOL(seq_open_init);
>>
>> A global exported-to-modules interface should be documented, please.
>> Especially when it has a void* argument.  seq_file.c is patchy - some
>> of it is documented, some of it uses the read-programmers-mind
>> approach.
> 
> I have included documentation as the second patch. Would it have been
> better to include them in a single patch? I didn't do that because
> seq_file and Documentation have different maintainers. I'm still
> learning the protocols here.

Whoever merges the fs/ changes can (should) also merge the Documentation changes.

-- 
~Randy