Re: [PATCH] split xfs_ioc

xfs

Re: [PATCH] split xfs_ioc_xattr

To:	Niv Sardi <xaiki@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject:	Re: [PATCH] split xfs_ioc_xattr
From:	Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxx>
Date:	Mon, 14 Apr 2008 05:29:40 +0200
Cc:	Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxx>, xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to:	<ncciqylf7q0.fsf@xxxxxxx>
References:	<20080319204014.GA23644@xxxxxx> <ncciqylf7q0.fsf@xxxxxxx>
Sender:	xfs-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent:	Mutt/1.3.28i

On Mon, Apr 14, 2008 at 01:14:47PM +1000, Niv Sardi wrote:
> 
> 
> Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxx> writes:
> > The three subcases of xfs_ioc_xattr don't share any semantics and almost
> > no code, so split it into three separate helpers.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxx>
> 
> Looks good to me, aren't the likely() unlinkely() deprecated ? shouldn't
> they be killed ?

Why would they be deprecated?

[More with this subject...]

<Prev in Thread]	Current Thread	[Next in Thread>
Re: [PATCH] split xfs_ioc_xattr, Niv Sardi Re: [PATCH] split xfs_ioc_xattr, Christoph Hellwig <= Re: [PATCH] split xfs_ioc_xattr, Niv Sardi Re: [PATCH] split xfs_ioc_xattr, David Chinner Re: [PATCH] split xfs_ioc_xattr, Timothy Shimmin Re: [PATCH] split xfs_ioc_xattr, Andi Kleen likely and unlikely was: Re: [PATCH] split xfs_ioc_xattr, Timothy Shimmin Re: likely and unlikely was: Re: [PATCH] split xfs_ioc_xattr, Andi Kleen Re: likely and unlikely was: Re: [PATCH] split xfs_ioc_xattr, Eric Sandeen Re: likely and unlikely was: Re: [PATCH] split xfs_ioc_xattr, David Chinner Re: likely and unlikely was: Re: [PATCH] split xfs_ioc_xattr, Andi Kleen Re: likely and unlikely was: Re: [PATCH] split xfs_ioc_xattr, David Chinner

Previous by Date:	Re: REVIEW XFSQA test out xfs_attr_shortform_bytesfit attr2/attr1 fix, David Chinner
Next by Date:	Re: REVIEW XFSQA test out xfs_attr_shortform_bytesfit attr2/attr1 fix, Timothy Shimmin
Previous by Thread:	Re: [PATCH] split xfs_ioc_xattr, Niv Sardi
Next by Thread:	Re: [PATCH] split xfs_ioc_xattr, Niv Sardi
Indexes:	[Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists]