On Sun, 1 April 2007 20:15:42 +0200, Jan Engelhardt wrote:
quoted text
>  
> +static inline void putstr(const char *s) {
> +    printk("%s", s);
> +    return;
> +}
> +
>  static int __init crd_load(int in_fd, int out_fd)
>  {
>  	int result;
> @@ -418,7 +423,7 @@ static int __init crd_load(int in_fd, in
>  		return -1;
>  	}
>  	makecrc();
> -	result = gunzip();
> +	result = gunzip(putstr);

You are sure this wasn't meant as an April fools joke?  Passing the
address of an inline function certainly has a humorous aspect. ;)

Also, you can remove the "return;" in the void function and possibly
change this bit to match Documentation/CodingStyle.

quoted text
> +    if(putstr != NULL) putstr("*");

The patch alternately uses puts() and putstr(), which looks rather odd.
Not sure whether that makes sense or not.

Jörn

-- 
My second remark is that our intellectual powers are rather geared to
master static relations and that our powers to visualize processes
evolving in time are relatively poorly developed.
-- Edsger W. Dijkstra
-
unsubscribe notice
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/