From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from relay.sgi.com (relay1.corp.sgi.com [137.38.102.111]) by oss.sgi.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A5C667F52 for ; Fri, 25 Apr 2014 01:55:46 -0500 (CDT) Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda2.sgi.com [192.48.176.25]) by relay1.corp.sgi.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7F19D8F8040 for ; Thu, 24 Apr 2014 23:55:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from bombadil.infradead.org ([198.137.202.9]) by cuda.sgi.com with ESMTP id b5u0JYmpNIgSGppa (version=TLSv1 cipher=AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for ; Thu, 24 Apr 2014 23:55:45 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 24 Apr 2014 23:55:45 -0700 From: Christoph Hellwig Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 10/10] xfs: isolate xfs_qm_quotacheck to its source file Message-ID: <20140425065545.GE20871@infradead.org> References: <535078D4.4000802@oracle.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <535078D4.4000802@oracle.com> List-Id: XFS Filesystem from SGI List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com Sender: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com To: Jeff Liu Cc: "xfs@oss.sgi.com" On Fri, Apr 18, 2014 at 08:59:00AM +0800, Jeff Liu wrote: > From: Jie Liu > > Isolate xfs_qm_quotacheck() to xfs_qm.c as there is no other users of it. > > Signed-off-by: Jie Liu Looks good, but the description is a bit confusing, we'd normallay say something like: "xfs: mark xfs_qm_quotacheck as static xfs_qm_quotacheck is not used outside of xfs_qm.c. Mark it static and move it around in the file to avoid a forward declaration." Reviewed-by: Christoph Hellwig _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs