Re: [RFC] fs/super.c: Why alloc_super use a static variable default_op?

["rae l" <crquan@gmail.com>]

On 7/25/07, Al Viro <viro@ftp.linux.org.uk> wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 25, 2007 at 11:48:35AM +0800, rae l wrote:
> > Why alloc_super use a static variable default_op?
> > the static struct super_operations default_op is just all zeros, and
> > just referenced as the initial value of a new allocated super_block,
> > what does it for?
>
> So that we would not have to care about ->s_op *ever* being NULL.
But is it valuable? Compared to a waste of sizeof(struct super_block)
bytes memory.

When some code want to refer fs_type->s_op, it almost always want to
refer some function pointer in s_op with fs_type->s_op->***, but all
pointers in default_op are all NULLs, what about this scenario?

and if you do grep s_op in the source code, you will found nowhere
will want to test s_op or dependent on s_op not NULL.

So my opinion is to remove default_ops, just keep new allocated s_op NULL.

>


--
Denis Cheng
Linux Application Developer

"One of my most productive days was throwing away 1000 lines of code."
- Ken Thompson.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/