Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1031365AbXEDIKa (ORCPT ); Fri, 4 May 2007 04:10:30 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1031366AbXEDIK3 (ORCPT ); Fri, 4 May 2007 04:10:29 -0400 Received: from mailer.gwdg.de ([134.76.10.26]:54745 "EHLO mailer.gwdg.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1031361AbXEDIJ7 (ORCPT ); Fri, 4 May 2007 04:09:59 -0400 Date: Fri, 4 May 2007 10:09:06 +0200 (MEST) From: Jan Engelhardt To: Andrew Morton cc: "Robert P. J. Day" , Linux Kernel Mailing List Subject: Re: [PATCH] Rewrite the MAJOR() macro as a call to imajor(). In-Reply-To: <20070503231814.e12ad2d7.akpm@linux-foundation.org> Message-ID: References: <20070503231814.e12ad2d7.akpm@linux-foundation.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Spam-Report: Content analysis: 0.0 points, 6.0 required _SUMMARY_ Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 642 Lines: 21 On May 3 2007 23:18, Andrew Morton wrote: >> struct inode *i = file->f_mapping->host; >> >> - return i && S_ISBLK(i->i_mode) && MAJOR(i->i_rdev) == LOOP_MAJOR; >> + return i && S_ISBLK(i->i_mode) && imajor(i) == LOOP_MAJOR; >> } > >there's no runtime change, and I count a couple hundred MAJORs in the tree. Why do we even have imajor() if all it does is calling the MAJOR() macro? Jan -- - 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/