> | + /* is this correct? */ > | + if (sbi->s_anchor[2] != 0) > | + seq_printf(seq, ",anchor=%u", sbi->s_anchor[2]); > > you know, I would prefer to use form UDF_SB_ANCHOR(sb)[2] > in sake of style unification but we should wait for Jan's > decision (i'm not the expert in this area ;) I think UDF_SB_ANCHOR macro was removed by some patch in -mm. I'm more interested if the second element of the s_anchor array really does always have the value of the 'anchor=N' mount option. I haven't been able to verify that fully. Do you have some insight into that? Thanks, Miklos - 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
