From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S932774Ab0CLNDP (ORCPT ); Fri, 12 Mar 2010 08:03:15 -0500 Received: from mail-bw0-f209.google.com ([209.85.218.209]:64611 "EHLO mail-bw0-f209.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932689Ab0CLNDO convert rfc822-to-8bit (ORCPT ); Fri, 12 Mar 2010 08:03:14 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <87aaud22jj.fsf@macbook.be.48ers.dk> References: <1268389504-22179-1-git-send-email-jacmet@sunsite.dk> <4B9A2548.7050401@msgid.tls.msk.ru> <87aaud22jj.fsf@macbook.be.48ers.dk> From: Kay Sievers Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2010 14:02:57 +0100 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH] devtmpfs: support !CONFIG_TMPFS To: Peter Korsgaard Cc: Michael Tokarev , gregkh@suse.de, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-embedded@vger.kernel.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Mar 12, 2010 at 12:38, Peter Korsgaard wrote: >>>>>> "Michael" == Michael Tokarev writes: >  >> +#ifdef CONFIG_TMPFS >  >> return get_sb_single(fs_type, flags, data, shmem_fill_super, mnt); >  >> +#else >  >> +   return get_sb_single(fs_type, flags, data, ramfs_fill_super, mnt); >  >> +#endif >  >> } > >  Michael> May be completely not to the point or even wrong, but I were >  Michael> starring at this change for quite some time trying to understand >  Michael> what's the difference.  Can we do it like this: > >  Michael> #ifdef CONFIG_TMPFS >  Michael> # define devtmpfs_fill_super shmem_fill_super >  Michael> #else >  Michael> # define devtmpfs_fill_super ramfs_fill_super >  Michael> #endif >  Michael>       return get_sb_single(fs_type, flags, data, devtmpfs_fill_super, mnt); > Sure, if people find that cleaner - Kay? For the style: I would prefer your original version. For the patch: Acked-by: Kay Sievers Thanks, Kay