Hi,
>> case XFS_FSOP_GOING_FLAGS_DEFAULT: {
>> - struct super_block *sb = freeze_bdev(mp->m_super->s_bdev);
>> + struct super_block *sb = freeze_bdev(mp->m_super->s_bdev, 0);
>
> Using NULL here is clearer and will, I expect, avoid a sparse warning.
I checked it but I couldn't find a sparse warning in xfs_fsops.c.
Can you tell me how to use NULL?
struct super_block *sb = freeze_bdev(mp->m_super->s_bdev, NULL);
:)
It's much better to use NULL here rather than literal zero because the
reader of this code can then say "ah-hah, we're passing in a pointer".
Whereas plain old "0" could be a pointer or a scalar.
The second argument's type of freeze_bdev() is "long", not pointer as below.
struct super_block *freeze_bdev(struct block_device *, long timeout_msec);
So "0" is reasonable, isn't it?
We should always use NULL to represent a null pointer in the kernel.
The one acceptable exception is when testing for nullness:
if (ptr1)
if (!ptr2)
Often people will use
if (ptr1 != NULL)
if (ptr2 == NULL)
in this case as well. (I prefer the shorter version personally, but
either is OK).
--
dm-devel mailing list
dm-devel@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/dm-devel
