Hi Christoph,
On Mon, Sep 02, 2019 at 05:47:37AM -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 02, 2019 at 08:13:06PM +0800, Gao Xiang wrote:
> > Hi Christoph,
> >
> > On Mon, Sep 02, 2019 at 05:10:21AM -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > > > {
> > > > - struct erofs_vnode *vi = ptr;
> > > > -
> > > > - inode_init_once(&vi->vfs_inode);
> > > > + inode_init_once(&((struct erofs_inode *)ptr)->vfs_inode);
> > >
> > > Why doesn't this use EROFS_I? This looks a little odd.
> >
> > Thanks for your reply and suggestion...
> > EROFS_I seems the revert direction ---> inode to erofs_inode
> > here we need "erofs_inode" to inode...
> >
> > Am I missing something?.... Hope not....
>
> No, you are not. But the cast still looks odd. Why not:
>
> struct erofs_inode *ei = ptr;
>
> inode_init_once(&ei->vfs_inode);
That is the old way, I thought you don't like the extra variable...
https://lore.kernel.org/linux-erofs/20190830154551.GA11571@xxxxxxxxxxxxx/
I am ok with either form, anyway, let me use the old way....
Thanks,
Gao Xiang
