Re: [PATCH 29/35] Unionfs: Superblock operations

[Jan Engelhardt]

On Dec 4 2006 07:31, Josef 'Jeff' Sipek wrote:
>+int init_inode_cache(void)
>+{
>+	int err = 0;
>+
>+	unionfs_inode_cachep =
>+	    kmem_cache_create("unionfs_inode_cache",
>+			      sizeof(struct unionfs_inode_info), 0,
>+			      SLAB_RECLAIM_ACCOUNT, init_once, NULL);
>+	if (!unionfs_inode_cachep)
>+		err = -ENOMEM;
>+	return err;
>+}
>+
>+void destroy_inode_cache(void)
>+{
>+	if (unionfs_inode_cachep)
>+		kmem_cache_destroy(unionfs_inode_cachep);
>+}

These function names could possibly clash with same-named functions
elsewhere, because they are not marked static. (This shows when two
features with same function names are compiled as y.) I grepped
through a 2.6.18 tree with unionfs, and unionfs was the only one
having this function name at this time. I would suggest prefixing it
somehow.


	-`J'
-- 
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/