Re: [PATCH 1/3] VFS: apply coding standards to fs/ioctl.c

On Sun, Oct 28, 2007 at 07:57:47PM -0700, Daniel Phillips wrote: > On 10/28/07, Christoph Hellwig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > While you're at it, it's probably worth splitting this out into > > a small helper function. > > Why? Is the same pattern called from more than one place? Becauase it's

Re: [PATCH 1/3] VFS: apply coding standards to fs/ioctl.c

On Sun, Oct 28, 2007 at 02:05:16PM -0400, Erez Zadok wrote: > > Sure. I assume you mean an internal function to encapsulate the entire case > statement's code, one for each of the FIO* cases. Yes. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message

Re: [PATCH 1/3] VFS: apply coding standards to fs/ioctl.c

On 10/28/07, Christoph Hellwig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > While you're at it, it's probably worth splitting this out into > a small helper function. Why? Is the same pattern called from more than one place? Regards, Daniel - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kerne

Re: [PATCH 1/3] VFS: apply coding standards to fs/ioctl.c

In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Christoph Hellwig writes: > Nice, I always hated these double-indented switch statements. > > > + case FIBMAP: > > + { > > + struct address_space *mapping = filp->f_mapping; > > + int res; > > + /* do we support this mess? */ > > +

Re: [PATCH 1/3] VFS: apply coding standards to fs/ioctl.c

Nice, I always hated these double-indented switch statements. > + case FIBMAP: > + { > + struct address_space *mapping = filp->f_mapping; > + int res; > + /* do we support this mess? */ > + if (!mapping->a_ops->bmap) > + r

[PATCH 1/3] VFS: apply coding standards to fs/ioctl.c

Signed-off-by: Erez Zadok <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> --- fs/ioctl.c | 164 +++- 1 files changed, 84 insertions(+), 80 deletions(-) diff --git a/fs/ioctl.c b/fs/ioctl.c index c2a773e..652cacf 100644 --- a/fs/ioctl.c +++ b/fs/ioctl.c @@ -12,8 +12,8