[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <1162535103.5635.20.camel@lade.trondhjem.org>
Date: Fri, 03 Nov 2006 01:25:03 -0500
From: Trond Myklebust <trond.myklebust@....uio.no>
To: Josef Sipek <jsipek@....cs.sunysb.edu>
Cc: Mark Williamson <mark.williamson@...cam.ac.uk>,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
Pekka Enberg <penberg@...helsinki.fi>,
Michael Halcrow <mhalcrow@...ibm.com>,
Erez Zadok <ezk@...sunysb.edu>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
Al Viro <viro@....linux.org.uk>, Andrew Morton <akpm@...l.org>,
linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] fsstack: Generic get/set lower object functions
On Thu, 2006-11-02 at 22:51 -0500, Josef Sipek wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 03, 2006 at 03:45:50AM +0000, Mark Williamson wrote:
> > > > Why are you defining all these structs that are just wrapping unions?
> > >
> > > The reason for the union is simple...
> ...
> > I guess that having a union foo * rather than a struct foo * would be a bit
> > unconventional in the kernel. The named struct / anonymous union combo does
> > hide the union as merely an implementation detail, which is nice. Was this
> > your motivation?
>
> That's exactly it. Save space & hide the details.
Why? What is so special about the details that you need to hide them?
This is a union that will always be part of a structure anyway.
Trond
-
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