Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id <S287149AbSAGV1c>; Mon, 7 Jan 2002 16:27:32 -0500
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org
	id <S287155AbSAGV1X>; Mon, 7 Jan 2002 16:27:23 -0500
Received: from parcelfarce.linux.theplanet.co.uk ([195.92.249.252]:36108 "EHLO
	www.linux.org.uk") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id <S287141AbSAGV1H>;
	Mon, 7 Jan 2002 16:27:07 -0500
Message-ID: <3C3A12A5.196C81B7@mandrakesoft.com>
Date: Mon, 07 Jan 2002 16:27:01 -0500
From: Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@mandrakesoft.com>
Organization: MandrakeSoft
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.79 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.4.18pre1 i686)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Daniel Phillips <phillips@bonn-fries.net>
CC: Anton Altaparmakov <aia21@cam.ac.uk>, torvalds@transmeta.com,
        viro@math.psu.edu, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
        linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, ext2-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
Subject: Re: PATCH 2.5.2.9: ext2 unbork fs.h (part 1/7)
In-Reply-To: <5.1.0.14.2.20020107134718.025e4d90@pop.cus.cam.ac.uk> <E16NbmV-0001R0-00@starship.berlin>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

Daniel Phillips wrote:
> 
> On January 7, 2002 03:13 pm, Anton Altaparmakov wrote:
> > Goodie. Now we need benchmarks for all the approaches... (-;
> >
> > At 13:21 07/01/02, Jeff Garzik wrote:
> > <snip>
> > >patch7: implement ext2 use of s_op->{alloc,destroy}
> > >
> > >         at this point we have what Linus described:
> > >
> > >                 struct ext2_inode_info {
> > >                         ...ext2 stuff...
> > >                         struct inode inode;
> > >                 };
> >
> > If we were to raise compiler requirements to gcc-2.96 or later this could
> > be simplified with an annonymous struct (having elements in struct inode
> > with the same name as elements in ...ext2 stuff... should be a shooting
> > offence IMO):
> >
> >          struct ext2_inode_info {
> >                  ...ext2 stuff...
> >                  struct inode;
> >          };
> >
> > Advantage of this would be that as far as the fs is concerned there is only
> > one inode and each element can just be dereferenced straight away without
> > need to think was that the generic inode or the fs inode and without need
> > for keeping two pointers around. This leads to simpler code inside the
> > filesystems once they adapt.
> 
> Interesting, it's something I've always wanted to be able to do.  But I
> suppose the compiler requirement is a stupport.

I am not a fan of anon unions/structs, so I must disagree with Anton
here...


> > Of course fs which are not adapted would still just work with the fs_i()
> > and fs_sb() macros and/or using two separate pointers.
> 
> Yes, the fs_* macros are the really critical part of all this.  I'd like to
> get them in early, while we hash out the rest of it.  I think Jeff supports
> me in this, possibly Al as well.

agreed, from my side

	Jeff



-- 
Jeff Garzik      | Alternate titles for LOTR:
Building 1024    | Fast Times at Uruk-Hai
MandrakeSoft     | The Took, the Elf, His Daughter and Her Lover
                 | Samwise Gamgee: International Hobbit of Mystery
-
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/