Re: [PATCH] mutliple root devs (take II)

From: Tigran Aivazian (tigran@veritas.com)
Date: Fri Dec 01 2000 - 11:57:20 EST

Next message: Roger Crandell: "multiprocessor kernel problem"
Previous message: T. Camp: "[PATCH] mutliple root devs (take II)"
In reply to: T. Camp: "[PATCH] mutliple root devs (take II)"
Next in thread: T. Camp: "Re: [PATCH] mutliple root devs (take II)"
Reply: T. Camp: "Re: [PATCH] mutliple root devs (take II)"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

Hello,

On Fri, 1 Dec 2000, T. Camp wrote:

> A much cleaner patch prompted after right proper chastisement on the

indeed, much cleaner. But still not perfect.

> + int root_device_index = 0;

this initialisation is not needed. Just make it 'int root_device_index;'
The kernel will do the right thing for you on boot, trust me.

> +int number_root_devs = 0;

this is not needed either.

Regards,
Tigran

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

Next message: Roger Crandell: "multiprocessor kernel problem"
Previous message: T. Camp: "[PATCH] mutliple root devs (take II)"
In reply to: T. Camp: "[PATCH] mutliple root devs (take II)"
Next in thread: T. Camp: "Re: [PATCH] mutliple root devs (take II)"
Reply: T. Camp: "Re: [PATCH] mutliple root devs (take II)"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu Dec 07 2000 - 21:00:08 EST