Re: 2.1.118 Tons of oopes

H. Peter Anvin (hpa@transmeta.com)
29 Aug 1998 08:40:12 GMT

Followup to: <199808290218.MAA28352@vindaloo.atnf.CSIRO.AU>
By author: Richard Gooch <rgooch@atnf.csiro.au>
In newsgroup: linux.dev.kernel
>
> Before I get into the part about the flames, I have a suggestion: how
> about we start using the GCC intialiser extensions? In other words, if
> I have a "xyz" driver, I do this:
>
> struct file_operations xyz_fops = {
> open:xyz_open,
> read:xyz_read,
> write:xyz_write,
> };
>
> if I only implement those 3 methods. This is insensitive to members
> being moved around and it seems to me that it solves the problem which
> Doug explained which is if you don't carefully look at the structure
> declaration beforehand, you're stuffed.
>
> Is this the way you'd like things to be done? This appears to be quite
> maintainable.
> If so, it seems to me it would make sense to change all the drivers
> over to this method. Would you accept a patch that does this?
>

IMNSHO, the whole usage of NULL silly. Is there a good reason why
we're not simply a pointer pointing to a routine implementing the
default action? (Does nothing if empty?) That way we wouldn't have
to have a null pointer check on every call...

-hpa

-- 
    PGP: 2047/2A960705 BA 03 D3 2C 14 A8 A8 BD  1E DF FE 69 EE 35 BD 74
    See http://www.zytor.com/~hpa/ for web page and full PGP public key
        I am Bahá'í -- ask me about it or see http://www.bahai.org/
   "To love another person is to see the face of God." -- Les Misérables


-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.altern.org/andrebalsa/doc/lkml-faq.html