[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <20080326110047.GD17176@elte.hu>
Date: Wed, 26 Mar 2008 12:00:51 +0100
From: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...e.hu>
To: Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk>
Cc: J?rn Engel <joern@...fs.org>, David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>,
jirislaby@...il.com, joe@...ches.com, tglx@...utronix.de,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Andy Whitcroft <apw@...dowen.org>
Subject: Re: [patch] bkl2mtd: cleanup
* Al Viro <viro@...IV.linux.org.uk> wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 26, 2008 at 11:14:52AM +0100, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > /* Info for the block device */
> > struct block2mtd_dev {
> > - struct list_head list;
> > - struct block_device *blkdev;
> > - struct mtd_info mtd;
> > - struct mutex write_mutex;
> > + struct list_head list;
> > + struct block_device *blkdev;
> > + struct mtd_info mtd;
> > + /* serializes writes with each other and also with erase: */
> > + struct mutex write_mutex;
> > };
>
> Why the hell?
the vertical alignment? For the same reason some of the key VFS data
structures in include/linux/fs.h are aligned vertically:
struct inode
struct file
struct super_block
struct address_space
struct block_device
there are several advantages of aligning structure fields vertically
(and the same applies to bulk initializers of structures), should i list
them?
Ingo
--
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