From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: James Morris Subject: Re: [PATCH 6/12: eCryptfs] Superblock operations Date: Thu, 3 Nov 2005 18:47:56 -0500 (EST) Message-ID: References: <20051103033220.GD2772@sshock.rn.byu.edu> <20051103035120.GF3005@sshock.rn.byu.edu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, mike@halcrow.us, mhalcrow@us.ibm.com, mcthomps@us.ibm.com, yoder1@us.ibm.com Return-path: To: Phillip Hellewell In-Reply-To: <20051103035120.GF3005@sshock.rn.byu.edu> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-fsdevel.vger.kernel.org On Wed, 2 Nov 2005, Phillip Hellewell wrote: > +static struct inode *ecryptfs_alloc_inode(struct super_block *sb) { > + struct ecryptfs_inode_info *ecryptfs_inode = NULL; > + struct inode *inode = NULL; > + ecryptfs_printk(1, KERN_NOTICE, "Enter; sb = [%p]\n", sb); > + ecryptfs_inode = ecryptfs_kmem_cache_alloc(ecryptfs_inode_info_cache, > + SLAB_KERNEL); Most of the kernel code separates variable declarations from code. Please do this with your code. For debugging and tracing, have a look at the ocfs2 masklog code. (It'd be nice to see something like that as a general kernel feature). - James -- James Morris