Received-SPF: pass (google.com: best guess record for domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 209.132.180.67 as permitted sender) client-ip=209.132.180.67;
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <155372999953.7602.13784796495137723805.stgit@warthog.procyon.org.uk>
 <155373036414.7602.7964458548629410897.stgit@warthog.procyon.org.uk>
 <CAJfpegvowwePJHEMRkaabx-NxLoJ5f8_QziPFyQUui+bmAaT1w@mail.gmail.com> <3217.1556119323@warthog.procyon.org.uk>
In-Reply-To: <3217.1556119323@warthog.procyon.org.uk>
From:   Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu>
Date:   Wed, 24 Apr 2019 19:28:44 +0200
Message-ID: <CAJfpegssSDWijX2Qnd0fQhCMkfmS3EZWp+=gMn_9S6E3H8wQBg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 44/68] vfs: Convert fuse to use the new mount API
To:     David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>
Cc:     Al Viro <viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk>, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Precedence: bulk

On Wed, Apr 24, 2019 at 5:22 PM David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com> wrote:
>
> Miklos Szeredi <miklos@szeredi.hu> wrote:
>
> > Should I be applying this, together with the vfs dependencies?  Or
> > will you take care of these?
>
> I'm hoping Al will take the entire series.
>
> > One minor comment is that fuse conventionally uses "struct fuse_conn
> > *fc", so "struct fs_context *fc" is confusing here.  There's one place
> > you use "struct fs_context *fsc", which seems the right thing to do
> > for all the cases.
>
> Except in ceph, where "struct ceph_fs_client *fsc" is a common thing...

I'd be happy if it was consistently "struct fs_context *fsc" in just
fuse/inode.c.

Thanks,
Miklos