[U-Boot] [PATCH v1 02/15] fs/fat: implement readdir

[Alexander Graf]

> Am 12.08.2017 um 16:04 schrieb Rob Clark <robdclark at gmail.com>:
> 
>> On Sat, Aug 12, 2017 at 8:17 AM, Alexander Graf <agraf at suse.de> wrote:
>> 
>> 
>>> On 10.08.17 20:29, Rob Clark wrote:
>>> 
>>> Yes, this is super-hacky.  The FAT code is quite ugly, and this doesn't
>>> improve things.  But it doesn't make it significantly worse either.  The
>>> better option would be a massive FAT re-write to get rid of the hacky
>>> way that fat_file_ls() works.  Volunteers welcome.
>>> 
>>> Signed-off-by: Rob Clark <robdclark at gmail.com>
>> 
>> 
>> What concerns me the most in patch 1/15 and this patch is the limited scope.
>> Yes, you make readdir work for FAT, but all other file systems are still
>> unimplemented. In fact, they're even all still implementing their own
>> hand-written ls logic.
>> 
>> One of the goals of the efi_loader code is to integrate with U-Boot as much
>> as possible, to reuse code where we can. And if current interfaces are
>> terrible, I think it's ok to just replace them for something that fits
>> everyone's needs better.
>> 
>> How feasible do you think it would be to implement an ls function based on
>> readdir and just convert all file systems to it, completely replacing the
>> current (quite crude) ls logic?
> 
> So I went ahead and re-wrote the fat directory traversal[1].  I should
> be posting to list in the next day or two but still want to make a few
> small cleanups.  (And to get rid of some hacks in efi_file, I think I
> need to add an fs_isdir() too :-/)
> 
> As far as the various other filesys's, I agree that a generic ls would
> be a nice goal.  But the scope of the efi_loader patchset has already
> expanded way too much, and at this point I'm pretty much limited by
> what I can finish this weekend.  At the end of the day, FAT is all
> that UEFI expects, so I think it is fine to let the other filesystems
> catch up on their own schedule.
> 
> I could write a generic ls helper, and just plug it in for FAT, which
> could be re-used later when other filesys's gain readdir support.

That at least sounds much nicer than duplicating ls functionality and moves us into the right direction.


Thanks!

Alex