[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [PATCH 03/14] repair: kill B_IS_META flag

To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 03/14] repair: kill B_IS_META flag
From: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2009 17:19:09 -0500
Cc: xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <20091013221646.GA31385@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
References: <20090902175531.469184575@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20090902175840.224768080@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <4AD38744.3010702@xxxxxxxxxxx> <20091013221646.GA31385@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
User-agent: Thunderbird (X11/20090320)
Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> 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.

Ok, I'm fine with that I suppose.


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