On May 4 2007 04:14, Robert P. J. Day wrote: >> On May 3 2007 23:18, Andrew Morton wrote: >> >> struct inode *i = file->f_mapping->host; >> >> >> >> - return i && S_ISBLK(i->i_mode) && MAJOR(i->i_rdev) == LOOP_MAJOR; >> >> + return i && S_ISBLK(i->i_mode) && imajor(i) == LOOP_MAJOR; >> >> } >> > >> >there's no runtime change, and I count a couple hundred MAJORs in the tree. >> >> Why do we even have imajor() if all it does is calling the MAJOR() >> macro? > > i'm guessing it's to hide the underlying implementation of >extracting the major/minor numbers from an inode, in case that >implementation ever changes, which strikes me as perfectly reasonable.
How often has the implementation changed? I think i_rdev has been there for a looong time. But yes, doing the MAJOR => imajor conversion is preferable. Because you don't need the struct declaration for inode then, and may omit to #include <linux/fs.h>. (Other things may need fs.h so it's a bit of a corner case.) > all i was doing was standardizing the small handful of holdouts. Please continue, this was not a rant :) Jan -- - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
