Re: [PATCH 02/31] Constify struct address_space_operations for2.6.32 v1

[Matthew Wilcox]

On Sat, Dec 05, 2009 at 01:36:56AM +0100, Emese Revfy wrote:
> Matthew Wilcox wrote:
> > On Fri, Dec 04, 2009 at 11:08:09PM +0100, Emese Revfy wrote:
> >> -	int (*writepage)(struct page *page, struct writeback_control *wbc);
> >> +	int (* const writepage)(struct page *page, struct writeback_control *wbc);
> > 
> > Umm.  What effect does this have?
> > What changes as a result of this patch?
> 
> My idea was that since all variables of this type are const, we might
> as well have the compiler enforce it for the future if you think that
> these fields should not be writable at all.

The compiler does already enforce it.  We do it like this:

struct address_space {
        const struct address_space_operations *a_ops;   /* methods */
}

-- 
Matthew Wilcox				Intel Open Source Technology Centre
"Bill, look, we understand that you're interested in selling us this
operating system, but compare it to ours.  We can't possibly take such
a retrograde step."
--
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/