| To: | Bill Kendall <wkendall@xxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: review: Simple patch to remove the dmapi support from xfsdump |
| From: | Dean Roehrich <dean.roehrich@xxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Mon, 7 Aug 2006 10:03:24 -0500 |
| Cc: | Russell Cattelan <cattelan@xxxxxxxxxxx>, Vlad Apostolov <vapo@xxxxxxx>, xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <44D3C351.7060109@xxxxxxx> |
| References: | <44D10F9B.8090904@xxxxxxxxxxx> <44D2CA85.3040208@xxxxxxx> <20060804141012.GA26@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <44D36985.1090006@xxxxxxxxxxx> <20060804155850.GA3338@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <44D379A6.9040200@xxxxxxx> <44D38D34.1010503@xxxxxxxxxxx> <44D3C351.7060109@xxxxxxx> |
| Sender: | xfs-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| User-agent: | Mutt/1.5.9i |
On Fri, Aug 04, 2006 at 04:59:45PM -0500, Bill Kendall wrote: > -#define DMF_EV_BITS ( (1<<DM_EVENT_DESTROY) | \ > - (1<<DM_EVENT_READ) | \ > - (1<<DM_EVENT_WRITE) | \ > - (1<<DM_EVENT_TRUNCATE) ) > +#define DMF_EV_BITS ( (1<<16) | (1<<17) | (1<<18) | (1<<20) ) Don't do that. Granted, those bits can never be changed else all of your customers will start a lynch mob and come after you. At the very least, don't allow those bits to be anonymous--copy that whole enum from the dmapi header. Even that I object to, but at least the bits will _be_ something. Dean |
| Previous by Date: | RE: Concurrent mount of XFS over SAN, Sebastian Brings |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: review: Simple patch to remove the dmapi support from xfsdump, Russell Cattelan |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: review: Simple patch to remove the dmapi support from xfsdump, Bill Kendall |
| Next by Thread: | Re: review: Simple patch to remove the dmapi support from xfsdump, Russell Cattelan |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |