On May 14 2007 15:13, Bharata B Rao wrote:
>+
>+ if (flag & 0x2) {
>+ error = union_copyup(nd, flag);
>+ if (error)
>+ goto exit;
>+ }
What I dislike (and that also goes for fs/namei.c and such) that they use
numeral constants, i.e. 0x2. That seems error-prone. Could this (and
the in-kernel users of 0x1/0x2/0x4) be turned into some constant?
>+ if (IS_DEADDIR(parent->d_inode))
>+ goto error;
>+ err = -EACCES; /* shouldn't it be ENOSYS? */
I do not think so. ENOSYS means Syscall not implemented. But it is
implemented. If ->i_op is not there does not imply ENOSYS.
Though, now that I grep through fs/*, I see that namei.c also
has that comment "shouldn't it be ENOSYS", so it's all at odds.
>+ if (!parent->d_inode->i_op || !parent->d_inode->i_op->create)
>+ goto error;
>+struct dentry * union_create_topmost(struct nameidata *nd, struct dentry *old)
>+{
>+ struct dentry *dentry;
>+ struct dentry *parent = nd->dentry;
>+
>+ UM_DEBUG_UID("dentry=%s\n", old->d_name.name);
>+
>+ BUG_ON(parent->d_sb == old->d_sb);
>+ if (!S_ISREG(old->d_inode->i_mode)) {
>+ UM_DEBUG("This filetype isn't supported!\n");
Does that mean I cannot create block devices, etc.?
>+int union_copy_file(struct dentry *old_dentry, struct vfsmount *old_mnt,
>+ struct dentry *new_dentry, struct vfsmount *new_mnt)
>+{
>+ int ret;
>+ size_t size;
>+ loff_t offset;
>+ struct file *old_file, *new_file;
>[...]
>+ size = i_size_read(old_file->f_path.dentry->d_inode);
>+ if (((size_t)size != size) || ((ssize_t)size != size)) {
No need to cast, size is already size_t. And then that left part
is somewhat superfluous.
>+ ret = -EFBIG;
>+ goto fput_new;
>+ }
>+
Jan
--
-
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/
