From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Christoph Hellwig Subject: Re: add file system helpers that take kernel pointers for the init code v3 Date: Sun, 26 Jul 2020 17:52:04 +0200 Message-ID: <20200726155204.GA24103@lst.de> References: <20200726071356.287160-1-hch@lst.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Return-path: Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: Sender: linux-api-owner-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org To: Linus Torvalds Cc: Christoph Hellwig , Al Viro , Greg Kroah-Hartman , "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Linux Kernel Mailing List , linux-raid-u79uwXL29TY76Z2rM5mHXA@public.gmane.org, linux-fsdevel , Linux API List-Id: linux-raid.ids On Sun, Jul 26, 2020 at 08:49:28AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Sun, Jul 26, 2020 at 12:14 AM Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > > > Hi Al and Linus, > > > > currently a lot of the file system calls in the early in code (and the > > devtmpfs kthread) rely on the implicit set_fs(KERNEL_DS) during boot. > > This is one of the few last remaining places we need to deal with to kill > > off set_fs entirely, so this series adds new helpers that take kernel > > pointers. These helpers are in init/ and marked __init and thus will > > be discarded after bootup. A few also need to be duplicated in devtmpfs, > > though unfortunately. > > I see nothing objectionable here. > > The only bikeshed comment I have is that I think the "for_init.c" name > is ugly and pointless - I think you could just call it "fs/init.c" and > it's both simpler and more straightforward. It _is_ init code, it's > not "for" init. That was Al's suggestion. I personally don't care, so if between the two of you, you can come up with a preferred choice I'll switch to it. From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.3 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A02A1C433E1 for ; Sun, 26 Jul 2020 15:52:09 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8654B2065F for ; Sun, 26 Jul 2020 15:52:09 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1727062AbgGZPwI (ORCPT ); Sun, 26 Jul 2020 11:52:08 -0400 Received: from verein.lst.de ([213.95.11.211]:40760 "EHLO verein.lst.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1726117AbgGZPwI (ORCPT ); Sun, 26 Jul 2020 11:52:08 -0400 Received: by verein.lst.de (Postfix, from userid 2407) id 16E2B68B05; Sun, 26 Jul 2020 17:52:04 +0200 (CEST) Date: Sun, 26 Jul 2020 17:52:04 +0200 From: Christoph Hellwig To: Linus Torvalds Cc: Christoph Hellwig , Al Viro , Greg Kroah-Hartman , "Rafael J. Wysocki" , Linux Kernel Mailing List , linux-raid@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel , Linux API Subject: Re: add file system helpers that take kernel pointers for the init code v3 Message-ID: <20200726155204.GA24103@lst.de> References: <20200726071356.287160-1-hch@lst.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.17 (2007-11-01) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Sun, Jul 26, 2020 at 08:49:28AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Sun, Jul 26, 2020 at 12:14 AM Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > > > Hi Al and Linus, > > > > currently a lot of the file system calls in the early in code (and the > > devtmpfs kthread) rely on the implicit set_fs(KERNEL_DS) during boot. > > This is one of the few last remaining places we need to deal with to kill > > off set_fs entirely, so this series adds new helpers that take kernel > > pointers. These helpers are in init/ and marked __init and thus will > > be discarded after bootup. A few also need to be duplicated in devtmpfs, > > though unfortunately. > > I see nothing objectionable here. > > The only bikeshed comment I have is that I think the "for_init.c" name > is ugly and pointless - I think you could just call it "fs/init.c" and > it's both simpler and more straightforward. It _is_ init code, it's > not "for" init. That was Al's suggestion. I personally don't care, so if between the two of you, you can come up with a preferred choice I'll switch to it.