Andrew Morton wrote:
> On Wed, 31 Dec 2008 17:33:41 +0200 Boaz Harrosh <bharrosh@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>> Andrew Morton wrote:
>>>> +int prepare_get_attr_list_add_entry(struct osd_request *req,
>>>> + uint32_t page_num,
>>>> + uint32_t attr_num,
>>>> + uint32_t attr_len)
>>>> +{
>>>> + struct osd_attr attr = {
>>>> + .page = page_num,
>>> Kernel developers expect a field called "page" to have type `struct
>>> page *'. osd_attr.page is thus designed to confuse.
>>>
>>>> ...
>>>>
>> Rant below (can be ignored):
>> This single fix will cause a massive change to the open-osd
>> initiator patchset, (18 patches), and resubmission .I made the mistake
>> because this name originates from a file that all naming conventions
>> are taken from the OSD standard text. However this is no excuse
>> for using a well known Kernel construct name. I will fix it. And
>> will be more careful in the future.
>
> The world wouldn't end if you left the code as-is. We've done worse things :)
To late I've changed it. I had an Internet outage yesterday so I've only just
pushed the new trees.
I'm glad. Because I found in exofs code, inside the same file, an "u32 page"
next to a "struct page *page" which is really bad. Now attr_page everywhere
is much clearer.
[ As usual:
git-clone git://git.open-osd.org/linux-open-osd.git linux-next-exofs
or on the web at:
http://git.open-osd.org/gitweb.cgi?p=linux-open-osd.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/heads/linux-next-exofs
]
I will submit another round of patches once I address all the other comments.
Thanks
Boaz
--
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
