Re: [PATCH 2/4] split-index; stop abusing the `base_oid` to strip the "link" extension

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Jeff Hostetler <git@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:

>>> +enum strip_extensions {
>>> +	WRITE_ALL_EXTENSIONS = 0,
>>> +	STRIP_ALL_EXTENSIONS = 1,
>>> +	STRIP_LINK_EXTENSION_ONLY = 2
>>> +};
>> We do not need to spell out the specific values for this enum; the
>> users' (i.e. the callers of do_write_index()) sole requirement is
>> for these symbols to have different values.
>
> There are several calls to do_write_locked_index() that pass 0 or 1
> as the new final arg.  If we update them to use these enum values,
> then we don't need integer values here.

Good eyes.  Yes, the new caller that selectively passes
STRIP_LINK_EXTENSION_ONLY should pass WRITE_ALL_EXTENSIONS, not 0,
on the other side of ?: as you pointed out.

Thanks.



[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel Development]     [Gcc Help]     [IETF Annouce]     [DCCP]     [Netdev]     [Networking]     [Security]     [V4L]     [Bugtraq]     [Yosemite]     [MIPS Linux]     [ARM Linux]     [Linux Security]     [Linux RAID]     [Linux SCSI]     [Fedora Users]

  Powered by Linux