Messages in this thread |  | | Date | Wed, 6 Dec 2006 12:32:45 -0500 | From | Josef Sipek <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH 26/35] Unionfs: Privileged operations workqueue |
| |
On Tue, Dec 05, 2006 at 02:50:13PM -0500, Josef Sipek wrote: > On Tue, Dec 05, 2006 at 08:27:51PM +0100, Jan Engelhardt wrote: > > > > On Dec 4 2006 07:30, Josef 'Jeff' Sipek wrote: > > >+#include "union.h" > > >+ > > >+struct workqueue_struct *sioq; > > >+ > > >+int __init init_sioq(void) > > > > Although it's just me, I'd prefer sioq_init(), sioq_exit(), > > sioq_run(), etc. to go in hand with what most drivers use as naming > > (i.e. <modulename> "_" <function>). > > That makes sense.
Hrm. Looking at the code, I noticed that the opposite is true:
destroy_filldir_cache(); destroy_inode_cache(); destroy_dentry_cache(); unregister_filesystem(&unionfs_fs_type);
The last one in particular...
> > >+void __unionfs_mknod(void *data) > > >+{ > > >+ struct sioq_args *args = data; > > >+ struct mknod_args *m = &args->mknod; > > > > Care to make that: const struct mknod_args *m = &args->mknod;? > > (Same for other places) > > Right.
If I make the *args = data line const, then gcc (4.1) yells about modifying a const variable 3 lines down..
args->err = vfs_mknod(m->parent, m->dentry, m->mode, m->dev);
Sure, I could cast, but that seems like adding cruft for no good reason.
Josef "Jeff" Sipek.
-- Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former. - Albert Einstein - 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/
|  |