Re: [Ext2-devel] [RFC] [PATCH] Clean up fs.h union for ext2

Andreas Dilger (adilger@turbolabs.com)
Sat, 29 Dec 2001 14:01:05 -0700


On Dec 29, 2001 10:04 -0600, Oliver Xymoron wrote:
> On Thu, 27 Dec 2001, Andreas Dilger wrote:
> > Minor nit: this is already done for the ext3 code, but it looks like:
> >
> > #define EXT3_I (&((inode)->u.ext3_i))
> >
> > We already have the EXT3_SB, so I thought I would be consistent with it:
> >
> > #define EXT3_SB (&((sb)->u.ext3_sb))
> >
> > Do people like the inline version better? Either way, I would like to make
> > the ext2 and ext3 codes more similar, rather than less.
>
> The ext3 macros are rather revolting, simply because they assume the
> variable name. A parameterized macro might be the best compromise:
>
> #define EXT2_I(i) (&(i->u.ext2_inode_info))

My mistake, the Ext3 macros _do_ take an inode/sb parameter. It's not that
I'm a huge fan of macros over inline functions, it's just that I would like
to have a consensus about how it should be done so that it is consistent
between ext2 and ext3.

Cheers, Andreas

--
Andreas Dilger
http://sourceforge.net/projects/ext2resize/
http://www-mddsp.enel.ucalgary.ca/People/adilger/

- 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/