Date: Mon, 14 Dec 2009 14:17:57 -0800
From: Arjan van de Ven <arjan@infradead.org>
To: Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz>
Cc: Emese Revfy <re.emese@gmail.com>, Paul Mundt <lethal@linux-sh.org>,
       Matthew Wilcox <matthew@wil.cx>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
       torvalds@linux-foundation.org, viro@zeniv.linux.org.uk,
       akpm@linux-foundation.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/1] Constify struct address_space_operations for
 2.6.32-git-053fe57ac v2
Message-ID: <20091214141757.73606259@infradead.org>
In-Reply-To: <20091214212526.GB9213@elf.ucw.cz>
References: <cover.1260662994.git.re.emese@gmail.com>
	<20091214003836.GD7812@parisc-linux.org>
	<4B2595E7.701@gmail.com>
	<20091214021916.GB12196@linux-sh.org>
	<4B25E47C.1010803@gmail.com>
	<20091214112656.GB1959@elf.ucw.cz>
	<20091214080049.19930729@infradead.org>
	<20091214212526.GB9213@elf.ucw.cz>
Organization: Intel
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1591
Lines: 46

On Mon, 14 Dec 2009 22:25:26 +0100
Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz> wrote:

> On Mon 2009-12-14 08:00:49, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> > On Mon, 14 Dec 2009 12:26:56 +0100
> > Pavel Machek <pavel@ucw.cz> wrote:
> > 
> > > > > Until such a consensus is reached one way or the other, please
> > > > > refrain from sending hundreds of patches -- one or two are
> > > > > sufficient for showing what you want to do until folks are on
> > > > > board with it, as is the typical nature of mechanical changes.
> > > > 
> > > > I think there is consensus to constify ops variables as much as
> > > > possible (e.g., Alexey's similar patches).
> > > 
> > > No such consensus exists. It is very clear from the patch
> > > reactions.
> > 
> > I for one am not opposed to using const where we could be using
> > const.
> 
> I certainly object "constify ops... as much as possible". If it
> uglifies the code, it should not be done. If it is as simple as adding
> const to few lines, its probably ok.
> 
> But .... the patch contained huge load of 
> 
> -	int (* resume)()
> +	int (* const resume)()
> 
> What is that?

the ops stuct instantiation itself should be const.
the members not so much; that makes no sense.


-- 
Arjan van de Ven 	Intel Open Source Technology Centre
For development, discussion and tips for power savings, 
visit http://www.lesswatts.org
--
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/