Re: [PATCH][1/7] xattr consolidation - libfs
From: James Morris
Date: Mon Aug 23 2004 - 23:34:08 EST
On Mon, 23 Aug 2004, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> Please don't do it this way. By making the xattr handlers constant for
> a superblock's lifetime you can get rid of all the locking, and the arbitrary
> limit on the number of xattrs.
Then you can't dynamically regsiter an xattr handler (e.g. as a module).
Is this really desirable?
> Also s/simple_// for most symbols as this stuff isn't simple, in fact it's
> quite complex :)
Removing the prefix would imply that this was the 'proper' way to
implement xattr support. Really, these are just helper functions for the
simplest xattr implementations. I think they should have some prefix, but
don't care too much what it actually is. Suggestions?
- James
--
James Morris
<jmorris@xxxxxxxxxx>
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/