Quoting Lina Iyer (2018-03-06 08:56:19)
> On Tue, Mar 06 2018 at 09:21 -0700, Lina Iyer wrote:
> >On Mon, Mar 05 2018 at 11:42 -0700, Stephen Boyd wrote:
> >>Quoting Lina Iyer (2018-02-26 09:58:01)
> >>>+size_t cmd_db_read_aux_data_len(const char *id)
> >>>+ int ret;
> >>>+ struct entry_header ent;
> >>>+ struct rsc_hdr rsc_hdr;
> >>>+ ret = cmd_db_get_header_by_rsc_id(id, &ent, &rsc_hdr);
> >>A bunch of code is calling this function. Why not change the user
> >>interface to use an opaque 'resource' cookie that we can 'get' or 'find'
> >>and then use that cookie in the rest of the API to pull out the data
> >>that's desired?
> >Fair point. Let me find out. I suspect this was done to keep the API
> >similar to other non-Linux interfaces. I am not sure why they all didn't
> >use a handle instead of char *.
> I was reminded that the APIs are generally used once for each resource
> and are used for multiple resources and usually only at init. The handle
> method doesn't buy much in benefits.
Ok. Let's take the wait and see approach then.