On Mon, 4 Dec 2006, Oliver Neukum wrote:
> > Also, Oliver, it looks like the latest version of your patch makes an
> > unnecessary change to sysfs_remove_file().
>
> Code like:
>
> int d(int a, int b)
> {
> return a + b;
> }
>
> int c(int a, int b)
> {
> return d(a, b);
> }
>
> is a detrimental to correct understanding and thence coding.
> In fact reading sysfs source code is like jumping all around the kernel
> tree. Such changes made it readable by normal people. I have to
> understand which method I am coding on to do reasonable work. ;-)
I was referring to sysfs_remove_file(), not sysfs_open_file() -- I agree
that getting rid of the check_perm() routine is good. But this isn't:
> void sysfs_remove_file(struct kobject * kobj, const struct attribute * attr)
> {
> - sysfs_hash_and_remove(kobj->dentry,attr->name);
> + struct dentry *d = kobj->dentry;
> +
> + sysfs_hash_and_remove(d, attr->name);
> }
There's no apparent advantage to introducing the local variable d, either
in terms of execution speed or readability. (Although the original source
line should have a space after the comma.)
Alan Stern
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
