| Message ID | 20210216223306.47693-2-hyeongseok@gmail.com (mailing list archive) |
|---|---|
| State | New, archived |
| Headers | show |
| Series | Add FITRIM ioctl support for exFAT filesystem | expand |
On 2/16/21 14:36, Hyeongseok Kim wrote: > Initialize empty ioctl function > > Signed-off-by: Hyeongseok Kim <hyeongseok@gmail.com> This patch doesn't do much, but this commit log could be better. Also from my experience there is not point in introducing an empty function.
On 2/17/21 8:51 AM, Chaitanya Kulkarni wrote: > On 2/16/21 14:36, Hyeongseok Kim wrote: >> Initialize empty ioctl function >> >> Signed-off-by: Hyeongseok Kim <hyeongseok@gmail.com> > This patch doesn't do much, but this commit log could be better. Sorry, I don't understand exactly. You're saying that these 2 patch should be merged to a single patch? Would it be better? > > Also from my experience there is not point in introducing an empty > function. >
On 2/16/21 16:13, Hyeongseok Kim wrote: > Sorry, I don't understand exactly. > You're saying that these 2 patch should be merged to a single patch? > Would it be better? I think so unless there is a specific reason for this to keep it isolated.
On 2/17/21 9:17 AM, Chaitanya Kulkarni wrote: > On 2/16/21 16:13, Hyeongseok Kim wrote: >> Sorry, I don't understand exactly. >> You're saying that these 2 patch should be merged to a single patch? >> Would it be better? > I think so unless there is a specific reason for this to keep it isolated. > The reason was just that I think it seems better to seperate ioctl initializing and adding specific ioctl functionality. Anyway, I got it. Namjae, Do you have any other opinion about this? If you agree, I'll merge these as one.
2021-02-17 9:33 GMT+09:00, Hyeongseok Kim <hyeongseok@gmail.com>: > On 2/17/21 9:17 AM, Chaitanya Kulkarni wrote: >> On 2/16/21 16:13, Hyeongseok Kim wrote: >>> Sorry, I don't understand exactly. >>> You're saying that these 2 patch should be merged to a single patch? >>> Would it be better? >> I think so unless there is a specific reason for this to keep it >> isolated. >> > The reason was just that I think it seems better to seperate ioctl > initializing and adding specific ioctl functionality. > Anyway, I got it. > > Namjae, Hi Hyeongseok, > Do you have any other opinion about this? I also think this patch should be combined with the 2/2 patch. > If you agree, I'll merge these as one. Yep, Agreed. Please do that:) Thanks! > >
On 2/17/21 2:39 PM, Namjae Jeon wrote: > Hi Hyeongseok, >> Do you have any other opinion about this? > I also think this patch should be combined with the 2/2 patch. >> If you agree, I'll merge these as one. > Yep, Agreed. Please do that:) > Thanks! Thank you for the opinion. I sent out v3.
diff --git a/fs/exfat/dir.c b/fs/exfat/dir.c index 916797077aad..e1d5536de948 100644 --- a/fs/exfat/dir.c +++ b/fs/exfat/dir.c @@ -4,6 +4,7 @@ */ #include <linux/slab.h> +#include <linux/compat.h> #include <linux/bio.h> #include <linux/buffer_head.h> @@ -306,6 +307,10 @@ const struct file_operations exfat_dir_operations = { .llseek = generic_file_llseek, .read = generic_read_dir, .iterate = exfat_iterate, + .unlocked_ioctl = exfat_ioctl, +#ifdef CONFIG_COMPAT + .compat_ioctl = exfat_compat_ioctl, +#endif .fsync = exfat_file_fsync, }; diff --git a/fs/exfat/exfat_fs.h b/fs/exfat/exfat_fs.h index 764bc645241e..a183021ae31d 100644 --- a/fs/exfat/exfat_fs.h +++ b/fs/exfat/exfat_fs.h @@ -420,6 +420,9 @@ int exfat_setattr(struct dentry *dentry, struct iattr *attr); int exfat_getattr(const struct path *path, struct kstat *stat, unsigned int request_mask, unsigned int query_flags); int exfat_file_fsync(struct file *file, loff_t start, loff_t end, int datasync); +long exfat_ioctl(struct file *filp, unsigned int cmd, unsigned long arg); +long exfat_compat_ioctl(struct file *filp, unsigned int cmd, + unsigned long arg); /* namei.c */ extern const struct dentry_operations exfat_dentry_ops; diff --git a/fs/exfat/file.c b/fs/exfat/file.c index a92478eabfa4..679828e7be07 100644 --- a/fs/exfat/file.c +++ b/fs/exfat/file.c @@ -4,6 +4,7 @@ */ #include <linux/slab.h> +#include <linux/compat.h> #include <linux/cred.h> #include <linux/buffer_head.h> #include <linux/blkdev.h> @@ -348,6 +349,22 @@ int exfat_setattr(struct dentry *dentry, struct iattr *attr) return error; } +long exfat_ioctl(struct file *filp, unsigned int cmd, unsigned long arg) +{ + switch (cmd) { + default: + return -ENOTTY; + } +} + +#ifdef CONFIG_COMPAT +long exfat_compat_ioctl(struct file *filp, unsigned int cmd, + unsigned long arg) +{ + return exfat_ioctl(filp, cmd, (unsigned long)compat_ptr(arg)); +} +#endif + int exfat_file_fsync(struct file *filp, loff_t start, loff_t end, int datasync) { struct inode *inode = filp->f_mapping->host; @@ -368,6 +385,10 @@ const struct file_operations exfat_file_operations = { .llseek = generic_file_llseek, .read_iter = generic_file_read_iter, .write_iter = generic_file_write_iter, + .unlocked_ioctl = exfat_ioctl, +#ifdef CONFIG_COMPAT + .compat_ioctl = exfat_compat_ioctl, +#endif .mmap = generic_file_mmap, .fsync = exfat_file_fsync, .splice_read = generic_file_splice_read,
Initialize empty ioctl function Signed-off-by: Hyeongseok Kim <hyeongseok@gmail.com> --- fs/exfat/dir.c | 5 +++++ fs/exfat/exfat_fs.h | 3 +++ fs/exfat/file.c | 21 +++++++++++++++++++++ 3 files changed, 29 insertions(+)