On Thu, Mar 08, 2001 at 11:16:10AM -0500, Alexander Viro wrote:
> I'm not sure on your #2. In principle, ->i_fop can be NULL. It may be
> a good thing to declare that it should never happens, but right now it's
> not guaranteed.
>
> Besides, revoke-like thing in proc/generic.c _does_ set f_op to NULL.
> It's damn ugly and the whole kill_inodes() should die slow and painful
> death, but right now that's the way it is done. Same thing for devfs,
> BTW - not that I thought that devfs deserved a different fate, but...
I'd rather see it set to null_file_ops then NULL. If it can be null,
that means we need to go through the fs directory adding them; there
are a few places it isn't checked right now.
--
Revolutions do not require corporate support.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
