On Mon, Nov 8, 2010 at 1:19 PM, Jeff Layton <[email protected]> wrote: > On Mon, 8 Nov 2010 13:04:15 -0600 > Shirish Pargaonkar <[email protected]> wrote: > >> >> >> >> I think we now have a consistent interface not only within >> >> various get/set_cifs_acl* functions but like most of the rest of of >> >> the functions >> >> i.e. they return error code and not a ptr to a structure when successful >> >> or an err ptr for failure? >> >> >> > >> > I'm not sure I understand your question. Can you rephrase it? >> > >> > -- >> > Jeff Layton <[email protected]> >> > >> >> I meant all the get/set_cifs_acl function now return an error code >> i.e. 0 for success and non-zero for an error. > > Ok, so what's the question? > > -- > Jeff Layton <[email protected]> >
no question, just stating the reason for changing signatures of get_cifs_acl* calls instead of them returning a ptr to the structure. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-cifs" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
