Re: get_unused_fd()
Magnus Ahltorp (map@stacken.kth.se)
21 Oct 1998 17:53:18 +0200
> It would be nice if you'ld show how _exactly_ you are going to use
> get_empty_filp(). There are several reasons to split inuse_filp into
> several lists (for superblock; for tty; for protocol family). That would
> simplify dquot.c and some nasty stuff in tty_io.c. Right now I'm
> experimenting with such patch and if everything will go OK I'm going to
> submit it to Linus in a day or two. We got waaay too many leaks/dangling
> pointers/etc. in the code that deals with struct file's. I'm trying to go
> through this stuff and massage it into something more coherent. And IMHO
> get_empty_filp() belongs to guts of that stuff.
First, do you have any objections against the export of the
get_unused_fd() call?
Regarding the get_empty_filp(), I'm simply using it for allocating a
struct file. The struct file gets filled in, and fd_install (this
symbol is exported, wow) is then used to put things where they should
be.
/Magnus
map@stacken.kth.se
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/