xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [PATCH 15/21] implement generic xfs_btree_rshift

To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 15/21] implement generic xfs_btree_rshift
From: Dave Chinner <david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Sat, 2 Aug 2008 11:20:42 +1000
Cc: xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <20080801194914.GI1263@xxxxxx>
Mail-followup-to: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxx>, xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
References: <20080729193125.GP19104@xxxxxx> <20080730060808.GP13395@disturbed> <20080801194914.GI1263@xxxxxx>
Sender: xfs-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17)
On Fri, Aug 01, 2008 at 09:49:14PM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > > +                           XFS_BB_NUM_BITS, &first, &last);
> > > +         xfs_trans_log_buf(cur->bc_tp, bp, first, last);
> > > + } else {
> > > +         /* XXX(hch): maybe factor out into a method? */
> > > +         xfs_trans_log_inode(cur->bc_tp, cur->bc_private.b.ip,
> > > +                 XFS_ILOG_FBROOT(cur->bc_private.b.whichfork));
> > 
> > I don't think it is necessary at this point.
> 
> It's the only leakage of the detailed inode root implementation into
> the generic code, so I'm still wondering whether a method would be
> better.

Ah, right. yes, it probably would be cleaner to do it as a
separate method, but Ǐ don't think it's that important right now.

Cheers,

Dave.
-- 
Dave Chinner
david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx


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