xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [PATCH 5/6] always use struct xfs_btree_block instead of short / lon

To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 5/6] always use struct xfs_btree_block instead of short / longform structures
From: Dave Chinner <david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 17 Sep 2008 10:59:55 +1000
Cc: xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <20080916173107.GB26187@xxxxxx>
Mail-followup-to: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxx>, xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
References: <20080915004657.GF12213@xxxxxx> <20080916062616.GY5811@disturbed> <20080916173107.GB26187@xxxxxx>
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17)
On Tue, Sep 16, 2008 at 07:31:07PM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 16, 2008 at 04:26:16PM +1000, Dave Chinner wrote:
> > On Mon, Sep 15, 2008 at 02:46:57AM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > > Always use the generic xfs_btree_block type instead of the short / long
> > > structures.  Add XFS_BTREE_SBLOCK_LEN / XFS_BTREE_LBLOCK_LEN defines for
> > > the length of a short / long form block.  The rationale for this is that
> > > we will grow more btree block header variants to support CRCs and other
> > > RAS information, and always accessing them through the same datatype
> > > with unions for the short / long form pointers makes implementing this
> > > much easier.
> > .......
> > > @@ -382,16 +382,16 @@ xfs_alloc_fixup_trees(
> > >   }
> > >  #ifdef DEBUG
> > >   {
> > > -         xfs_alloc_block_t       *bnoblock;
> > > -         xfs_alloc_block_t       *cntblock;
> > > +         struct xfs_btree_block          *bnoblock;
> > > +         struct xfs_btree_block          *cntblock;
> > 
> > Only need one tab there?
> 
> I think this was aligning to something, but I don't really care.
> 
> > > -                 bnoblock = XFS_BUF_TO_ALLOC_BLOCK(bno_cur->bc_bufs[0]);
> > > -                 cntblock = XFS_BUF_TO_ALLOC_BLOCK(cnt_cur->bc_bufs[0]);
> > >                   XFS_WANT_CORRUPTED_RETURN(
> > > -                         be16_to_cpu(bnoblock->bb_numrecs) ==
> > > -                         be16_to_cpu(cntblock->bb_numrecs));
> > > +                         bnoblock->bb_numrecs ==
> > > +                         cntblock->bb_numrecs);
> > 
> > The comparison could probably be made one line....
> 
> That would be far over 80 characters.

I meant:
                        XFS_WANT_CORRUPTED_RETURN(
                                bnoblock->bb_numrecs == cntblock->bb_numrecs);

Which doesn't go over 80 chars.

Doesn't really matter, though.

Cheers,

Dave.
-- 
Dave Chinner
david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx

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