[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.61.0610171237220.22888@yvahk01.tjqt.qr>
Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2006 12:40:31 +0200 (MEST)
From: Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@...ux01.gwdg.de>
To: Josef Jeff Sipek <jsipek@...sunysb.edu>
cc: Andrew James Wade <andrew.j.wade@...il.com>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>,
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...l.org>, hch@...radead.org,
Al Viro <viro@....linux.org.uk>, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
Pekka Enberg <penberg@...helsinki.fi>, ezk@...sunysb.edu,
mhalcrow@...ibm.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1 of 2] fsstack: Introduce fsstack_copy_{attr,inode}_*
>To: null@...efsipek.net
(Superb idea to prekill any Cc, re-adding them)
>+void __fsstack_copy_attr_all(struct inode *dest,
>+ const struct inode *src,
>+ int (*get_nlinks)(struct inode *))
>+{
>[big]
>+}
>+
>+/* externs for fs/stack.c */
>+extern void __fsstack_copy_attr_all(struct inode *dest,
>+ const struct inode *src,
>+ int (*get_nlinks)(struct inode *));
>+
>+static inline void fsstack_copy_attr_all(struct inode *dest,
>+ const struct inode *src)
>+{
>+ __fsstack_copy_attr_all(dest, src, NULL);
>+}
Do we really need this indirection? Can't __fsstack_copy_attr_all be
named fsstack_copy_attr_all instead?
-`J'
--
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists