Re: [PATCH] VFS KPI/API versioning
- From: Peter Pentchev <roam@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 29 Aug 2009 17:25:07 +0300
On Sat, Aug 29, 2009 at 04:04:55AM +0200, Attilio Rao wrote:
[snip]
Something that concerned me is also the mis-usage of the VFS_VERSION
macro, which can be easilly used at compile time in order to determine
if a feature is present or not. Basically, I have no idea by when it
doesn't get updated and if it has ever been checked in our codes. It
seems to use a random number as the start count, while it could have
been handled differently. Maybe it would be the case to start taking
care of that too, which can be an interesting tool.
Quite offtopic, just a note about the "random number as the start count"
part - it's not exactly random; take a "fgrep 1966" to calendar.freebsd ;)
G'luck,
Peter
--
Peter Pentchev roam@xxxxxxxxxxx roam@xxxxxxxx roam@xxxxxxxxxxx
PGP key: http://people.FreeBSD.org/~roam/roam.key.asc
Key fingerprint FDBA FD79 C26F 3C51 C95E DF9E ED18 B68D 1619 4553
This would easier understand fewer had omitted.
Attachment:
pgp5b8JXJOeZm.pgp
Description: PGP signature
- References:
- [PATCH] VFS KPI/API versioning
- From: Attilio Rao
- [PATCH] VFS KPI/API versioning
- Prev by Date: [PATCH] VFS KPI/API versioning
- Next by Date: Re: [PATCH] VFS KPI/API versioning
- Previous by thread: [PATCH] VFS KPI/API versioning
- Next by thread: Re: [PATCH] VFS KPI/API versioning
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
