From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-path: Received: from mail-qk0-x233.google.com ([2607:f8b0:400d:c09::233]) by bombadil.infradead.org with esmtps (Exim 4.80.1 #2 (Red Hat Linux)) id 1aNQlY-0005P2-Kd for barebox@lists.infradead.org; Sun, 24 Jan 2016 19:56:05 +0000 Received: by mail-qk0-x233.google.com with SMTP id x1so47580828qkc.1 for ; Sun, 24 Jan 2016 11:55:42 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <1453663456-5168-1-git-send-email-yegorslists@googlemail.com> References: <1453663456-5168-1-git-send-email-yegorslists@googlemail.com> From: Yegor Yefremov Date: Sun, 24 Jan 2016 20:55:22 +0100 Message-ID: List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: "barebox" Errors-To: barebox-bounces+u.kleine-koenig=pengutronix.de@lists.infradead.org Subject: Re: [RFC] fs: move super_block and inode definitions to central fs.h header To: barebox On Sun, Jan 24, 2016 at 8:24 PM, Yegor Yefremov wrote: > Both super_block and inode are common to various file systems, so > move them to the central place. > > Signed-off-by: Yegor Yefremov > --- > fs/ubifs/ubifs.h | 134 +------------------------------------------------------ > include/fs.h | 134 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > 2 files changed, 135 insertions(+), 133 deletions(-) I'm trying to port SquashFS to Barebox. SquashFS uses at least both super_block structure as also inode structure. Does it make sense to introduce include/linux/fs.h? What to do with struct timespec? It is defined in uapi part. Should it go to include/linux/barebox-wrapper.h? Yegor _______________________________________________ barebox mailing list barebox@lists.infradead.org http://lists.infradead.org/mailman/listinfo/barebox