Re: [PATCH RESUBMIT 1/2] fs/seq_file: Create new function seq_open_init()

From: Rob Jones
Date: Thu Sep 25 2014 - 13:54:57 EST

On 25/09/14 18:50, Andrew Morton wrote:
On Thu, 25 Sep 2014 10:10:05 +0100 Rob Jones <rob.jones@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

A global exported-to-modules interface should be documented, please.
Especially when it has a void* argument. seq_file.c is patchy - some
of it is documented, some of it uses the read-programmers-mind

I have included documentation as the second patch. Would it have been
better to include them in a single patch? I didn't do that because
seq_file and Documentation have different maintainers. I'm still
learning the protocols here.

A single patch would be OK.

Documentation/ is nice, but I don't think people think to look there.
Some kerneldoc within the .c would be a good addition.

Now is a good time, can you point me at an instance of good practice of

__seq_open_private() has
void *private;

single_open() has
void *data

And now seq_open_init() has
void *p

but these all refer to the same thing. Can we have a bit of
consistency in the naming please? I suggest "private", to match
the seq_file field.

A valid point and I can easily make the change but fixing single_open()
would mean that the patch is addressing two issues, is that acceptable?
Another protocol question, sorry.

I guess switch this patch to use "private" then a second one to fix

Rob Jones
Codethink Ltd
tel:+44 161 236 5575
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at
Please read the FAQ at