xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [Patch] Remove xlog_ticket allocator

To: David Chinner <dgc@xxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [Patch] Remove xlog_ticket allocator
From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 7 Apr 2008 08:46:13 -0400
Cc: xfs-dev <xfs-dev@xxxxxxx>, xfs-oss <xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx>
In-reply-to: <20080401231439.GU103491721@xxxxxxx>
References: <20080401231439.GU103491721@xxxxxxx>
Sender: xfs-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.17 (2007-11-01)
On Wed, Apr 02, 2008 at 09:14:39AM +1000, David Chinner wrote:
> ===================================================================
> --- 2.6.x-xfs-new.orig/fs/xfs/xfs_vfsops.c    2008-03-13 13:58:08.866070224 
> +1100
> +++ 2.6.x-xfs-new/fs/xfs/xfs_vfsops.c 2008-03-13 13:59:59.208010688 +1100
> @@ -68,15 +68,17 @@ xfs_init(void)
>       /*
>        * Initialize all of the zone allocators we use.
>        */
> +     xfs_log_ticket_zone = kmem_zone_init(sizeof(xlog_ticket_t),
> +                                             "xfs_log_ticket");
>       xfs_bmap_free_item_zone = kmem_zone_init(sizeof(xfs_bmap_free_item_t),
> -                                              "xfs_bmap_free_item");
> +                                             "xfs_bmap_free_item");
>       xfs_btree_cur_zone = kmem_zone_init(sizeof(xfs_btree_cur_t),
> -                                         "xfs_btree_cur");
> -     xfs_trans_zone = kmem_zone_init(sizeof(xfs_trans_t), "xfs_trans");
> -     xfs_da_state_zone =
> -             kmem_zone_init(sizeof(xfs_da_state_t), "xfs_da_state");
> +                                             "xfs_btree_cur");
> +     xfs_da_state_zone = kmem_zone_init(sizeof(xfs_da_state_t),
> +                                             "xfs_da_state");
>       xfs_dabuf_zone = kmem_zone_init(sizeof(xfs_dabuf_t), "xfs_dabuf");
>       xfs_ifork_zone = kmem_zone_init(sizeof(xfs_ifork_t), "xfs_ifork");
> +     xfs_trans_zone = kmem_zone_init(sizeof(xfs_trans_t), "xfs_trans");

kmem_zone_init can fail so both for the new and old calls we need
some error handling here.  Could probably be a separate patch.

Otherwise this looks fine.


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>