* Peter Zijlstra <pet...@infradead.org> wrote:
> > Why should we have two callbacks next to each other:
> >
> > event_vfs_getname(result);
> > result = check_event_vfs_getname(result);
> >
> > if one could do it all?
>
> Did you actually read the bit where I said that check_event_* (although
> I still think that name sucks) could imply a matching event_*?
No, did not notice that - and yes that solves this particular problem.
So given that by your own admission it makes sense to share the facilities at
the low level, i also argue that it makes sense to share as high up as
possible.
Are you perhaps arguing for a ->observe flag that would make 100% sure that the
default behavior for events is observe-only? That would make sense indeed.
Otherwise both cases really want to use all the same facilities for event
discovery, setup, control and potential extraction of events.
Thanks,
Ingo
_______________________________________________
Linuxppc-dev mailing list
Linuxppc-dev@lists.ozlabs.org
https://lists.ozlabs.org/listinfo/linuxppc-dev
