On Mon, Oct 19, 2009 at 05:24:00AM -0700, Andrew Morton wrote: > On Mon, 19 Oct 2009 11:49:09 +0200 Nick Piggin <npiggin@xxxxxxx> wrote: > > > generates a definition, not a declaration. Hence DEFINE_BRLOCK. > > > > > > </petpeeve #29> > > > > Well yes, but being a static inline, then I don't know of a better > > way. Probably just better not to pretend we are expanding a simple > > declaration here, and name it something differently? (BRLOCK_HEADER(blah))? > > DEFINE_BRLOCK(blah) Well I use DEFINE_BRLOCK for the .c file definitions which include non-static non-inline functions, so you can't put it in a .h. So AFAIKS you need both. Athough DECLARE_BRLOCK is not strictly for declarations because of those static inline functions so I agree the name is not ideal. -- 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
