lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2006]   [Jul]   [3]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
DateMon, 03 Jul 2006 08:18:59 -0700
From"H. Peter Anvin" <>
SubjectRe: [patch 7/8] inode-diet: Use a union for i_blocks and i_size, i_rdev and i_devices
Theodore Tso wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 03, 2006 at 10:06:42AM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
>> On Sun, Jul 02, 2006 at 08:53:40PM -0400, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
>>> The i_blocks and i_size fields are only used for regular files. So we
>>> move them into the union, along with i_rdev and i_devices, which are
>>> only used by block or character devices.
>> Can we please make this a named instead of unnamed union so everyone still
>> using the fields will trip up? To reduce the impact a few more imajor/iminor
>> conversions might be needed were direct references to i_rdev crept back in.
>
> I did that originally but when I sent out my first version of patches
> for review, other developers asked me to use an unnamed union ---
> since otherwise the patch would be much, much larger (lots of changes
> would need to be made) and that makes it much harder to merge into
> either Andrew's or Linus's tree.
>
> What do other people think? I can go either way on this one.
>

I think people need to know they're using a union, and hence it should
be named. Otherwise it's really easy to stare blindly at a piece of
code, not understanding why touching i_foo affects i_bar.

-hpa
-
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/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2006-07-03 17:22    [from the cache]
©2003-2010