Re: [PATCH 1/2] VFS/Security: Rework inode_getsecurity and callers to return resulting buffer

Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]
From: James Morris
Date: Tuesday, October 23, 2007 - 4:38 pm

On Mon, 22 Oct 2007, David P. Quigley wrote:


It's better to keep function declarations on one line if possible (the 
80-col rule can be broken for this).

But in any case, it looks ok to me.


Acked-by: James Morris <jmorris@namei.org>


-- 
James Morris
<jmorris@namei.org>
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Previous message: [thread] [date] [author]
Next message: [thread] [date] [author]

Messages in current thread:
[RFC 0/2] getsecurity/vfs_getxattr cleanup, David P. Quigley, (Mon Oct 22, 12:06 pm)
[PATCH 1/2] VFS/Security: Rework inode_getsecurity and cal ..., David P. Quigley, (Mon Oct 22, 12:10 pm)
[PATCH 2/2] VFS: Reorder vfs_getxattr to avoid unnecessary ..., David P. Quigley, (Mon Oct 22, 12:11 pm)
Re: [RFC 0/2] getsecurity/vfs_getxattr cleanup, David P. Quigley, (Tue Oct 23, 1:17 pm)
Re: [PATCH 1/2] VFS/Security: Rework inode_getsecurity and ..., James Morris, (Tue Oct 23, 4:38 pm)
Re: [PATCH 1/2] VFS/Security: Rework inode_getsecurity and ..., David P. Quigley, (Fri Oct 26, 10:36 am)