Re: 2.6: why no EXPORT_SYMBOL of get_sb_pseudo()?

[Mikael Pettersson <mikpe@csd.uu.se>]

Mikael Pettersson writes:
 > viro@parcelfarce.linux.theplanet.co.uk writes:
 >  > On Wed, Oct 01, 2003 at 11:04:30AM +0200, Mikael Pettersson wrote:
 >  > > fs/libfs.c:get_sb_pseudo() isn't exported to modules,
 >  > > but a lot of the other stuff in fs/libfs.c is.
 >  > > 
 >  > > Is there a particular reason for this or just an oversight?
 >  > > 
 >  > > Making a private copy of get_sb_pseudo()'s definition works
 >  > > in a module, but that's not exactly productive use of
 >  > > programmer time or source and object code space.
 >  > 
 >  > Are you really sure that get_sb_pseudo() is what you need?  It might be
 >  > possible, but I suspect that simple_fill_super() would be the right thing
 >  > to use.  Care to give details?
 > 
 > I have a pseudo fs to support special files constructed and
 > returned as the result of certain operations in the module.
 > 
 > This is very very similar to what e.g. pipefs does, so the
 > fs implementation is closely modelled after fs/pipe.c. And
 > since pipefs, futexes, and a number of other pseudo fs:s in
 > the kernel all use get_sb_pseudo() in their ->get_sb method,
 > I figured I should do the same.

I've now checked what simple_fill_super() does, and it doesn't
seem like a valid replacement for get_sb_pseudo(), especially
since it allocates a root directory inode and populates it.
This is clearly not needed for a pseudo fs that won't be mounted.

I can submit a trivial patch to export get_sb_pseudo(), but it
may fare better with Linus if Al ACKs it first.

/Mikael