On Thu, 16 Nov 2000, Tigran Aivazian wrote:
> on the other hand, even 1 minute's thought reveals that making strict
> logical separation between "consumers of inode with sb" and "consumers of
> inode without sb" is probably worth the overhead of an extra function
> call. So, I don't strongly feel about the above... maybe you are right :)
It's not the with sb/without sb thing. Everything is much simpler -
changing the get_empty_inode() prototype means mandatory changes in
all 3rd-party code. Code freeze and all such...
IOW, unmodified code doesn't break from the addition of helper function,
but changing get_empty_inode() will break (albeit in a trivial way)
every bloody filesystem out there. Not a problem for 2.5, but doing that
now for no good reason...
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
