Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Thu, 3 Jan 2002 11:48:59 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Thu, 3 Jan 2002 11:48:55 -0500 Received: from leibniz.math.psu.edu ([146.186.130.2]:2224 "EHLO math.psu.edu") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Thu, 3 Jan 2002 11:48:00 -0500 Date: Thu, 3 Jan 2002 11:47:58 -0500 (EST) From: Alexander Viro To: Daniel Phillips cc: Christoph Hellwig , acme@conectiva.com.br, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [CFT] [JANITORIAL] Unbork fs.h In-Reply-To: Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Thu, 3 Jan 2002, Daniel Phillips wrote: > On January 3, 2002 04:45 pm, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > > In article you wrote: > > > - inode = get_empty_inode(); > > > + inode = get_empty_inode(sb); > > > > How about killing get_empty_inode completly and using new_inode() instead? > > There should be no regularly allocated inode without a superblock. > > There are: sock_alloc rd_load_image. However that's a nit because the new, > improved get_empty_inode understands the concept of null sb. (Another thing > we could do is require every inode to have a superblock - that's probably > where it will go in time.) It's _already_ there. RTFS, please - sock_alloc() creates inodes with sockfs superblock in ->i_sb and rd_load_image() just does normal open() for device nodes on rootfs. Please, don't reintroduce the crap we'd already killed. - 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/