Re: [Final call for testers][PATCH] superblock handling changes (2.4.6-pre3)

• Next message: Amit S. Kale: "kgdb for 2.4.5 kernels"
• Previous message: Alexander Viro: "Re: [Final call for testers][PATCH] superblock handling changes (2.4.6-pre3)"
• In reply to: Alexander Viro: "Re: [Final call for testers][PATCH] superblock handling changes (2.4.6-pre3)"
• Next in thread: Matthew Wilcox: "Re: [Final call for testers][PATCH] superblock handling changes (2.4.6-pre3)"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

On Fri, 15 Jun 2001, Alexander Viro wrote:

> > > + list_add (&s->s_list, super_blocks.prev);
> >
> > I'd use list_add_tail(&s->s_list, super_blocks);
>
> Umm... Why? I've no problems with either variant, but I really see no
> clear win (or loss) in list_add_tail here. If there is some code that

OK, my fault - I shouldn't post before the first cup of coffee. Sorry -
I've missed the point here. Yes, list_add_tail() would be OK here.

-
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/

• Next message: Amit S. Kale: "kgdb for 2.4.5 kernels"
• Previous message: Alexander Viro: "Re: [Final call for testers][PATCH] superblock handling changes (2.4.6-pre3)"
• In reply to: Alexander Viro: "Re: [Final call for testers][PATCH] superblock handling changes (2.4.6-pre3)"
• Next in thread: Matthew Wilcox: "Re: [Final call for testers][PATCH] superblock handling changes (2.4.6-pre3)"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri Jun 15 2001 - 21:00:25 EST