On Mon, Sep 03, 2007 at 08:52:17AM +0200, Jan Engelhardt wrote: > > On Sep 2 2007 22:20, Josef 'Jeff' Sipek wrote: > >@@ -184,10 +183,92 @@ out: > > } > > > > /* > >+ * Determine if the lower inode objects have changed from below the unionfs > >+ * inode. Return 1 if changed, 0 otherwise. > >+ */ > >+int is_newer_lower(const struct dentry *dentry) > > Could use bool and true/false as return value. I remember that way back when there was a discussion about the bool type. What how did that end? Is bool preferred? > >-int __unionfs_d_revalidate_chain(struct dentry *dentry, struct nameidata *nd) > >+int __unionfs_d_revalidate_chain(struct dentry *dentry, struct nameidata *nd, > >+ int willwrite) > > also looks like a bool (willwrite) Right. > >- if (!__unionfs_d_revalidate_chain(dentry, NULL)) { > >+ if (!__unionfs_d_revalidate_chain(dentry, NULL, 0)) { > > (Are there any callers with ,1?) Indirectly yes. There are callers that pass a value they get. Very large majority is 0. Jeff. -- Bad pun of the week: The formula 1 control computer suffered from a race condition - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-fsdevel" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html