Re: [patch 7/8] inode-diet: Use a union for i_blocks and i_size, i_rdev and i_devices

["H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@zytor.com>]

Theodore Tso wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 03, 2006 at 10:06:42AM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > On Sun, Jul 02, 2006 at 08:53:40PM -0400, Theodore Ts'o wrote:
> > > The i_blocks and i_size fields are only used for regular files.  So we
> > > move them into the union, along with i_rdev and i_devices, which are
> > > only used by block or character devices.
> > Can we please make this a named instead of unnamed union so everyone still
> > using the fields will trip up?  To reduce the impact a few more imajor/iminor
> > conversions might be needed were direct references to i_rdev crept back in.
>
> I did that originally but when I sent out my first version of patches
> for review, other developers asked me to use an unnamed union ---
> since otherwise the patch would be much, much larger (lots of changes
> would need to be made) and that makes it much harder to merge into
> either Andrew's or Linus's tree.
>
> What do other people think?  I can go either way on this one.

I think people need to know they're using a union, and hence it should 
be named.  Otherwise it's really easy to stare blindly at a piece of 
code, not understanding why touching i_foo affects i_bar.

	-hpa
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/