From: Artem Bityutskiy <dedekind1@gmail.com>
To: subrata@linux.vnet.ibm.com
Cc: Sachin P Sant <sachinp@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>,
Stefan Richter <stefanr@s5r6.in-berlin.de>,
linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org,
Balbir Singh <balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@nokia.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Clean up some extra unused arguments in fs/ubifs/
Date: Fri, 17 Jul 2009 16:33:17 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4A607D9D.6090301@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1247837392.5690.3.camel@subratamodak.linux.ibm.com>
Subrata Modak wrote:
> On Fri, 2009-07-17 at 10:28 +0300, Artem Bityutskiy wrote:
>> On Fri, 2009-07-17 at 11:51 +0530, Subrata Modak wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> "const struct ubifs_info *c" exists as an extra argument for major
>>> function definitions under the "fs/ubifs/*" code. The reason why
>>> this extra argument exists is based on assumtion that there
>>> will be several key schemes. It is possible to add more than one,
>>> but we use only one. When there is practically no usage of them
>>> presently, they can be removed, and if needed can be added later.
>>>
>>> The following patch does that by removing:
>>> 1) "const struct ubifs_info *c" where it is not used/necessary,
>>> 2) remove xent_key_init_hash() function, as it is also not used,
>>> 3) remove data_key_init_flash() function, as it is also not used anywhere,
>> Fine with 2 and 3. Not fine with 1, unless it makes the code smaller
>> or more optimal.
>
> Hmmm. I see. But, it took 95% of my effort.
But yesterday I said that I would not like to remove that argument
unless it makes the code larger. You answered you would check this.
And then you came up with this patches.
> Ok then, do you want me to
> send a separate patch for 2) & 3), or, you will automatically isolate
> them from the sent one.
I can isolate them myself, thanks for the patch.
--
Best Regards,
Artem Bityutskiy (Артём Битюцкий)
WARNING: multiple messages have this Message-ID (diff)
From: Artem Bityutskiy <dedekind1@gmail.com>
To: subrata@linux.vnet.ibm.com
Cc: dedekind@infradead.org,
Stefan Richter <stefanr@s5r6.in-berlin.de>,
Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@nokia.com>,
Sachin P Sant <sachinp@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
David Howells <dhowells@redhat.com>,
linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org,
Balbir Singh <balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com>,
LKML <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Clean up some extra unused arguments in fs/ubifs/
Date: Fri, 17 Jul 2009 16:33:17 +0300 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4A607D9D.6090301@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1247837392.5690.3.camel@subratamodak.linux.ibm.com>
Subrata Modak wrote:
> On Fri, 2009-07-17 at 10:28 +0300, Artem Bityutskiy wrote:
>> On Fri, 2009-07-17 at 11:51 +0530, Subrata Modak wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> "const struct ubifs_info *c" exists as an extra argument for major
>>> function definitions under the "fs/ubifs/*" code. The reason why
>>> this extra argument exists is based on assumtion that there
>>> will be several key schemes. It is possible to add more than one,
>>> but we use only one. When there is practically no usage of them
>>> presently, they can be removed, and if needed can be added later.
>>>
>>> The following patch does that by removing:
>>> 1) "const struct ubifs_info *c" where it is not used/necessary,
>>> 2) remove xent_key_init_hash() function, as it is also not used,
>>> 3) remove data_key_init_flash() function, as it is also not used anywhere,
>> Fine with 2 and 3. Not fine with 1, unless it makes the code smaller
>> or more optimal.
>
> Hmmm. I see. But, it took 95% of my effort.
But yesterday I said that I would not like to remove that argument
unless it makes the code larger. You answered you would check this.
And then you came up with this patches.
> Ok then, do you want me to
> send a separate patch for 2) & 3), or, you will automatically isolate
> them from the sent one.
I can isolate them myself, thanks for the patch.
--
Best Regards,
Artem Bityutskiy (Артём Битюцкий)
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2009-07-17 13:33 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2009-07-17 6:21 [PATCH] Clean up some extra unused arguments in fs/ubifs/ Subrata Modak
2009-07-17 6:21 ` Subrata Modak
2009-07-17 7:28 ` Artem Bityutskiy
2009-07-17 7:28 ` Artem Bityutskiy
2009-07-17 13:29 ` Subrata Modak
2009-07-17 13:29 ` Subrata Modak
2009-07-17 13:33 ` Artem Bityutskiy [this message]
2009-07-17 13:33 ` Artem Bityutskiy
2009-07-17 13:40 ` Artem Bityutskiy
2009-07-17 13:40 ` Artem Bityutskiy
2009-07-17 13:42 ` Subrata Modak
2009-07-17 13:42 ` Subrata Modak
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=4A607D9D.6090301@gmail.com \
--to=dedekind1@gmail.com \
--cc=adrian.hunter@nokia.com \
--cc=balbir@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=dhowells@redhat.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-mtd@lists.infradead.org \
--cc=sachinp@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
--cc=stefanr@s5r6.in-berlin.de \
--cc=subrata@linux.vnet.ibm.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.