Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 03 Jan 2002 17:28:57 +0100 | From | Martin Dalecki <> | Subject | Re: [CFT] [JANITORIAL] Unbork fs.h |
| |
Daniel Phillips wrote:
>On January 3, 2002 05:05 pm, Ion Badulescu wrote: > >>Daniel Phillips wrote: >> >>>+static struct file_system_type ext2_fs = { >>>+ owner: THIS_MODULE, >>>+ fs_flags: FS_REQUIRES_DEV, >>>+ name: "ext2", >>>+ read_super: ext2_read_super, >>>+ super_size: sizeof(struct ext2_sb_info), >>>+ inode_size: sizeof(struct ext2_inode_info) >>>+}; >>> >>While we're at it, can we extend this model to also include details about >>the other filesystem data structures with (potential) private info, i.e. >>struct dentry and struct file? ext2 might not use them, but other >>filesystems certainly do. >> > >Hi, > >Could you be more specific about what you mean, please? > >>>-static inline struct inode * new_inode(struct super_block *sb) >>>+static inline struct inode *new_inode (struct super_block *sb) >>> >>Minor issue of coding style. I'd steer away from such gratuitious changes, >>especially since they divert from the commonly accepted practice of having >>no spaces between the name of the function and its arguments. >> > >That's good advice and I'm likely to adhere to it - if you can show that >having no spaces between the name of the function and its arguments really is >the accepted practice. > It is trust on that. Only the silly GNU indentation style introduced something else. Look at the "core kernel" and not the ugly drivers around it.
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |