| To: | Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxxxxxx> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: [PATCH 03/14] repair: kill B_IS_META flag |
| From: | Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> |
| Date: | Tue, 13 Oct 2009 18:16:46 -0400 |
| Cc: | Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx |
| In-reply-to: | <4AD38744.3010702@xxxxxxxxxxx> |
| References: | <20090902175531.469184575@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20090902175840.224768080@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <4AD38744.3010702@xxxxxxxxxxx> |
| User-agent: | Mutt/1.5.19 (2009-01-05) |
On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 02:45:08PM -0500, Eric Sandeen wrote: > Christoph Hellwig wrote: > >> B_IS_META is the inverse flag of B_IS_INODE which is not really obvious >> from it's use. So just use !B_IS_INODE to make it more clear. >> > > Logic-wise it's fine, but is this change really helpful? The comment says: > > /* > * Test if bit 0 or 2 is set in the "priority tag" of the buffer to see if > * the buffer is for an inode or other metadata. > */ > > so basically it distinguishes inodes from other metadata right. Yes, with the key on other. In my books inodes are meta-data. > B_IS_INODE is clear; B_IS_META is pretty clear, "!B_IS_INODE" seems muddy; so > very many things are "not inodes" :) In a buffercache (and in fact a whole application) that only deals with metadata at all !B_IS_INODE meaning other metadata seems a lot more clear to me than B_IS_META. |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: [PATCH 01/14] repair: merge scanfunc_bno and scanfunc_cnt, Christoph Hellwig |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: [PATCH 03/14] repair: kill B_IS_META flag, Eric Sandeen |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: [PATCH 03/14] repair: kill B_IS_META flag, Eric Sandeen |
| Next by Thread: | Re: [PATCH 03/14] repair: kill B_IS_META flag, Eric Sandeen |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |