[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <99679ee6-ccda-0c58-3278-14fb8cb8534c@nod.at>
Date: Fri, 21 Oct 2016 17:10:48 +0200
From: Richard Weinberger <richard@....at>
To: Theodore Ts'o <tytso@....edu>, linux-mtd@...ts.infradead.org,
linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org,
dedekind1@...il.com, adrian.hunter@...el.com, jaegeuk@...nel.org,
david@...ma-star.at, wd@...x.de, sbabic@...x.de,
dengler@...utronix.de
Subject: Re: [PATCH 02/26] fscrypto: Constify struct inode pointer
Ted,
On 21.10.2016 16:57, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 21, 2016 at 02:48:17PM +0200, Richard Weinberger wrote:
>> Some filesystems, such as UBIFS, maintain a const pointer
>> for struct inode.
>>
>> /* fname.c */
>> -extern int fscrypt_setup_filename(struct inode *, const struct qstr *,
>> - int lookup, struct fscrypt_name *);
>> +extern int fscrypt_setup_filename(struct inode *dir, const struct qstr *iname,
>> + int lookup, struct fscrypt_name *fname);
>
> Was it deliberate that you didn't add a const pointer here?
Erm, no. Either I forgot or while rebasing my mess to something
sane the change got lost.
> I take it that ubifs is basically using const in certain places to
> essentially promise that those functions don't actually modify the
> inode structure?
Yes.
Thanks,
//richard
Powered by blists - more mailing lists