Re: [-mm patch] unionfs: make functions static

[Josef Sipek <jsipek@fsl.cs.sunysb.edu>]

On Mon, Jul 02, 2007 at 04:27:59AM +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 01, 2007 at 09:42:49PM -0400, Josef Sipek wrote:
> > On Sun, Jul 01, 2007 at 10:23:30PM +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> > > This patch makes some needlessly global functions static.
> > > 
> > ...
> > > --- linux-2.6.22-rc6-mm1/fs/unionfs/lookup.c.old	2007-07-01 00:05:02.000000000 +0200
> > > +++ linux-2.6.22-rc6-mm1/fs/unionfs/lookup.c	2007-07-01 00:06:05.000000000 +0200
> > > @@ -18,6 +18,8 @@
> > >  
> > >  #include "union.h"
> > >  
> > > +static int realloc_dentry_private_data(struct dentry *dentry);
> > > +
> > >  /* is the filename valid == !(whiteout for a file or opaque dir marker) */
> > 
> > I forget who said it, but someone wasn't very happy with prototypes like
> > that in .c files. What's the prefered way - are they ok for static symbols?
> 
> It might have even been me who said this - but about global functions.
> 
> For global functions, prototypes in header files allow gcc to check 
> whether the prototype matches the actual function. With a prototype
> in the C file of the caller that's not possible, and if they are 
> different it can result in nasty runtime errors.
> 
> For static functions that's not an issue since gcc sees both the 
> prototype and the actual function.
 
Ok, fair enough. Applied & pushed to korg tree.

Thanks.

Josef "Jeff" Sipek.

-- 
Once you have their hardware. Never give it back.
(The First Rule of Hardware Acquisition)
-
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/