On Fri, May 01, 2009 at 04:42:53AM -0600, Andreas Dilger wrote:
quoted text
> On May 01, 2009  00:37 -0400, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
> > @@ -3923,6 +3911,12 @@ static int __init init_ext4_fs(void)
> > +	ext4_nojournal_sops = ext4_sops;
> > +	ext4_nojournal_sops.write_super = ext4_write_super;
> > +	ext4_nojournal_sops.sync_fs = 0;
> > +	ext4_nojournal_sops.freeze_fs = 0;
> > +	ext4_nojournal_sops.unfreeze_fs = 0;
> 
> I thought the general policy these days was to make a static const
> ops struct so that it cannot be changed (correctly or incorrectly)?

Yeah.  Having the super ops in the normal style would be a lot more
readable.  We don't copy mostly the same inode or file operations
either.

And to be super-pedantic NULL pointer should be initialized as NULL, not
0.

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-ext4" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html