On Sun, 1 April 2007 20:15:42 +0200, Jan Engelhardt wrote:
>
> +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.
> + 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
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
