Re: [PATCH] fix memory corruption from misinterpreted bad_inode_opsreturn values

[Stephen Rothwell]

Hi Eric,

On Wed, 03 Jan 2007 12:42:47 -0600 Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> So here's the first stab at fixing it.  I'm sure there are style points
> to be hashed out.  Putting all the functions as static inlines in a header
> was just to avoid hundreds of lines of simple function declarations before
> we get to the meat of bad_inode.c, but it's probably technically wrong to
> put it in a header.  Also if putting a copyright on that trivial header file
> is going overboard, just let me know.  Or if anyone has a less verbose
> but still correct way to address this problem, I'm all ears.

Since the only uses of these functions is to take their addresses, the
inline gains you nothing and since the only uses are in the one file, you
should just define them in that file.

--
Cheers,
Stephen Rothwell                    sfr@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.canb.auug.org.au/~sfr/

Attachment: pgp00000.pgp
Description: PGP signature