Re: [PATCH] vfs: avoid recopying filename in getname_flags

2015-03-20 Thread Boqun Feng
Hi Al, Ping and sorry to bother you. Could you please have a look at my question? Thank you! Regards, Boqun Feng On Wed, Mar 18, 2015 at 01:27:24PM +0800, Boqun Feng wrote: > On Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 09:45:59AM -0400, Paul Moore wrote: > > On Monday, March 09, 2015 04:24:32 PM Boqun Feng wrote:

Re: [PATCH] vfs: avoid recopying filename in getname_flags

2015-03-20 Thread Boqun Feng
Hi Al, Ping and sorry to bother you. Could you please have a look at my question? Thank you! Regards, Boqun Feng On Wed, Mar 18, 2015 at 01:27:24PM +0800, Boqun Feng wrote: On Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 09:45:59AM -0400, Paul Moore wrote: On Monday, March 09, 2015 04:24:32 PM Boqun Feng wrote:

Re: [PATCH] vfs: avoid recopying filename in getname_flags

2015-03-17 Thread Boqun Feng
On Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 09:45:59AM -0400, Paul Moore wrote: > On Monday, March 09, 2015 04:24:32 PM Boqun Feng wrote: > > Ping. > > Any opinion? > > You might want to look at some of the recent changes to Al's vfs.git#for-next > branch; at the very least it looks like your patch should be

Re: [PATCH] vfs: avoid recopying filename in getname_flags

2015-03-17 Thread Boqun Feng
On Fri, Mar 13, 2015 at 09:45:59AM -0400, Paul Moore wrote: On Monday, March 09, 2015 04:24:32 PM Boqun Feng wrote: Ping. Any opinion? You might want to look at some of the recent changes to Al's vfs.git#for-next branch; at the very least it looks like your patch should be rebased

Re: [PATCH] vfs: avoid recopying filename in getname_flags

2015-03-13 Thread Paul Moore
On Monday, March 09, 2015 04:24:32 PM Boqun Feng wrote: > Ping. > Any opinion? You might want to look at some of the recent changes to Al's vfs.git#for-next branch; at the very least it looks like your patch should be rebased against those changes. > On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 8:31 PM, Boqun Feng

Re: [PATCH] vfs: avoid recopying filename in getname_flags

2015-03-13 Thread Paul Moore
On Monday, March 09, 2015 04:24:32 PM Boqun Feng wrote: Ping. Any opinion? You might want to look at some of the recent changes to Al's vfs.git#for-next branch; at the very least it looks like your patch should be rebased against those changes. On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 8:31 PM, Boqun Feng

Re: [PATCH] vfs: avoid recopying filename in getname_flags

2015-03-09 Thread Boqun Feng
Ping. Any opinion? Thanks, Boqun Feng On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 8:31 PM, Boqun Feng wrote: > In the current implementation of getname_flags, filename in the > user-space will be recopied if it takes more space that > EMBEDDED_NAME_MAX, however, at this moment, EMBEDDED_NAME_MAX bytes of > the

Re: [PATCH] vfs: avoid recopying filename in getname_flags

2015-03-09 Thread Boqun Feng
Ping. Any opinion? Thanks, Boqun Feng On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 8:31 PM, Boqun Feng boqun.f...@gmail.com wrote: In the current implementation of getname_flags, filename in the user-space will be recopied if it takes more space that EMBEDDED_NAME_MAX, however, at this moment, EMBEDDED_NAME_MAX

[PATCH] vfs: avoid recopying filename in getname_flags

2015-02-25 Thread Boqun Feng
In the current implementation of getname_flags, filename in the user-space will be recopied if it takes more space that EMBEDDED_NAME_MAX, however, at this moment, EMBEDDED_NAME_MAX bytes of the filename are already copied into kernel space, the only reason why the recopy is needed is that "kname"

[PATCH] vfs: avoid recopying filename in getname_flags

2015-02-25 Thread Boqun Feng
In the current implementation of getname_flags, filename in the user-space will be recopied if it takes more space that EMBEDDED_NAME_MAX, however, at this moment, EMBEDDED_NAME_MAX bytes of the filename are already copied into kernel space, the only reason why the recopy is needed is that kname