[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-Id: <200911300604.nAU64D0s021921@agora.fsl.cs.sunysb.edu>
Date: Mon, 30 Nov 2009 01:04:13 -0500
From: Erez Zadok <ezk@...sunysb.edu>
To: Valerie Aurora <vaurora@...hat.com>
Cc: Jan Blunck <jblunck@...e.de>,
Alexander Viro <viro@...iv.linux.org.uk>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
Andy Whitcroft <apw@...onical.com>,
Scott James Remnant <scott@...onical.com>,
Sandu Popa Marius <sandupopamarius@...il.com>,
Jan Rekorajski <baggins@...h.mimuw.edu.pl>,
"J. R. Okajima" <hooanon05@...oo.co.jp>,
Arnd Bergmann <arnd@...db.de>,
Vladimir Dronnikov <dronnikov@...il.com>,
Felix Fietkau <nbd@...nwrt.org>, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 03/41] VFS: Make lookup_hash() return a struct path
In message <1256152779-10054-4-git-send-email-vaurora@...hat.com>, Valerie Aurora writes:
> @@ -1937,7 +1942,8 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL(filp_open);
> */
> struct dentry *lookup_create(struct nameidata *nd, int is_dir)
> {
> - struct dentry *dentry = ERR_PTR(-EEXIST);
> + struct path path = { .dentry = ERR_PTR(-EEXIST) } ;
I assume the compiler will initialize path.mnt to NULL. Is NULL what you
want? Even if the compiler guarantees it, I think you should either
explicitly init .mnt to NULL or leave a comment explaining what's going on
-- so no future code reader will think that this was omitted; a comment can
clarify your intentions more explicitly.
A struct path often requires both .mnt and .dentry to be set; it's not like,
say, inode_operations, where clearly some fields can be initialized to NULL
just fine.
Erez.
--
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