On Tue, Oct 31, 2017 at 3:14 PM, Miklos Szeredi <miklos@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Is this really necessary? > > "ovl_entry.h" is supposed to be more of a low level thing, and I'm not > sure having that proliferate to all parts of the code is a good idea. > > At least some justification would be good here. The "problem" is that include "ovl_entry.h" is already included by 5/8 overlayfs c files and by the end of the NFS export series its 7/9 and there are exported functions in overlayfs.h whose signature include pointers to structs defined in ovl_entry.h, so I started forward declaring those structs in overlayfs.h. After you look at the next patch "anonymous devs for lowerdirs" let me know if you prefer a different distribution between the 2 include files, or a 3rd include file. Thanks, Amir. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-unionfs" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
