xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Is jdm_delete_filehandle part of a public API?

To: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: Is jdm_delete_filehandle part of a public API?
From: Mark Tinguely <tinguely@xxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 29 Jul 2014 15:04:02 -0500
Cc: xfs-oss <xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Delivered-to: xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <53D7E56C.8020103@xxxxxxx>
References: <53D7DA7F.2040706@xxxxxxxxxx> <53D7E56C.8020103@xxxxxxx>
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; FreeBSD amd64; rv:9.0) Gecko/20120122 Thunderbird/9.0
On 07/29/14 13:18, Mark Tinguely wrote:
On 07/29/14 12:31, Eric Sandeen wrote:
I was cleaning up xfsprogs to plug some leaks, and wanted to use
jdm_delete_filehandle(). I noticed that it has an "hlen" argument which
is unused.

Can we remove that, or is this part of a public API? It's not in any
manpage (or even called anywhere in xfsprogs/xfstests/xfsdump/dmapi)
but it is in a public header...

anyone know?

If needed I guess I can just call it with hlen==0, but that seems odd.

Thanks,
-Eric

The first thing that comes to mind is maybe they trying to distinguish
between a fshandle or handle. Or they we trying to be consistent with
the allocation calls.

The libhandle free_handle has the same calling parameters. It also does
nothing with the length. That we cannot change without breaking existing
code.

I will look/ask around.

--Mark.

Looks like the code is pretty sloppy with freeing the handles.

Best guess is jdm_delete_filehandle() and free_handle are trying to keep the API similar to DMAPI. The DMAPI handle free routine, dm_handle_free(), also has a second length parameter that is not used in the library.

The code example that I saw are similar to the use in xfsdump, where the length used in the free comes from the handle creation/conversion routine.

Since the xfsprogs do not open handles with calls that provide a length. How about FSHANDLE_SZ and FILEHANDLE_SZ depending on if it is a xfs_fshandle or xfs_handle?

--Mark.

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>