2013/10/28 Geyslan Gregório Bem <[email protected]>: > 2013/10/28 Geyslan Gregório Bem <[email protected]> >> >> 2013/10/27 Eric Van Hensbergen <[email protected]> >>> >>> Looks like the right approach. The one other optional thing I mentioned >>> was support for passing NULL for rdev and not trying to parse the device >>> info when rdev == NULL. Its a very slight optimization in the grand scheme >>> of things, but would seem to be cleaner for the folks calling the function >>> who don't touch rdev after the fact... >>> >>> -eric >>> >> Great. Let me do the changes this afternoon. >> >> > Hi Eric and all. > > You requested to avoid the parsing of device when rdev is NULL, all > right? But I'm afraid that that manner the res (return value) can be > returned wrong when the bit mode is a device. Well, I did some > changes. In this new approach, when rdev is NULL, the function only > doesn't make the device, but returns the res (umode_t) nicely. > > Tell me if this approach is correct. Do I have to modify something else? > > -- > Regards, > > Geyslan G. Bem > hackingbits.com
Eric, I sent the new patch: [PATCH] 9p: code refactor in vfs_inode.c -- Regards, Geyslan G. Bem hackingbits.com -- 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/
