Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1765623AbZDJJDT (ORCPT ); Fri, 10 Apr 2009 05:03:19 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1755072AbZDJJDF (ORCPT ); Fri, 10 Apr 2009 05:03:05 -0400 Received: from mx3.mail.elte.hu ([157.181.1.138]:59905 "EHLO mx3.mail.elte.hu" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756637AbZDJJDC (ORCPT ); Fri, 10 Apr 2009 05:03:02 -0400 Date: Fri, 10 Apr 2009 11:01:49 +0200 From: Ingo Molnar To: Alexey Dobriyan , Andy Whitcroft Cc: akpm@linux-foundation.org, containers@lists.linux-foundation.org, xemul@parallels.com, serue@us.ibm.com, dave@linux.vnet.ibm.com, orenl@cs.columbia.edu, hch@infradead.org, torvalds@linux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 04/30] ipcns: add create_ipc_ns() Message-ID: <20090410090149.GD17962@elte.hu> References: <20090410023358.GE27788@x200.localdomain> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20090410023358.GE27788@x200.localdomain> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) X-ELTE-VirusStatus: clean X-ELTE-SpamScore: -1.5 X-ELTE-SpamLevel: X-ELTE-SpamCheck: no X-ELTE-SpamVersion: ELTE 2.0 X-ELTE-SpamCheck-Details: score=-1.5 required=5.9 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=no SpamAssassin version=3.2.3 -1.5 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 0 to 1% [score: 0.0000] Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1433 Lines: 50 * Alexey Dobriyan wrote: > --- a/include/linux/ipc_namespace.h > +++ b/include/linux/ipc_namespace.h > @@ -97,6 +97,7 @@ static inline int mq_init_ns(struct ipc_namespace *ns) { return 0; } > > #if defined(CONFIG_IPC_NS) > extern void free_ipc_ns(struct ipc_namespace *ns); > +struct ipc_namespace *create_ipc_ns(void); > extern struct ipc_namespace *copy_ipcs(unsigned long flags, > struct ipc_namespace *ns); > extern void free_ipcs(struct ipc_namespace *ns, struct ipc_ids *ids, Hm, doesnt the existing, correct pattern strike your eyes out: extern foo1(); extern foo2(); extern foo3(); and then you add a new method in this inconsistent way: extern foo1(); foox(); extern foo2(); extern foo3(); Instead of continuing the existing pattern via: extern foo1(); extern foox(); extern foo2(); extern foo3(); ? I think we need a new checkpatch warning for such things. It might be a small detail in the big picture, but a thousand small details create a big mess easily so we have to try to get all the small details right, all the time - that is the only way to create a better kernel in the end. Thanks, Ingo -- 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/