David Chinner wrote: > On Tue, Jun 19, 2007 at 03:25:52PM +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >> +static int xfs_bulkstat_one_compat( >> + xfs_mount_t *mp, /* mount point for filesystem */ >> + xfs_ino_t ino, /* inode number to get data for */ >> + void __user *buffer, /* buffer to place output in */ >> + int ubsize, /* size of buffer */ >> + void *private_data, /* my private data */ >> + xfs_daddr_t bno, /* starting bno of inode cluster */ >> + int *ubused, /* bytes used by me */ >> + void *dibuff, /* on-disk inode buffer */ >> + int *stat) /* BULKSTAT_RV_... */ > > Hmmm - this is almost all duplicated code. It's pretty much what I > described, but maybe not /quite/ what I had in mind here. It's a > *big* improvement on the first version, but it seems now that the > only real difference xfs_bulkstat_one() and > xfs_bulkstat_one_compat() is copy_to_user() vs the discrete put_user > calls. > > I think we can remove xfs_bulkstat_one_compat() completely by using > the same method you used with the xfs_inumber_fmt functions.
You mean xfs_ioc_bulkstat_compat() -> native xfs_bulkstat() -> native xfs_bulkstat_one() -> a compat output formatter, so a pointer-to-function passed to pointer-to-function? ;) I could (ab)use the void *private_data arg which xfs_bulkstat passes unmodified to the formatter; xfs_bulkstat_one() doesn't make use of it atm. I'll try it and post the result in a while. Michal - 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/
