xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [PATCH 03/15] mkfs: Sanitise the superblock feature macros

To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 03/15] mkfs: Sanitise the superblock feature macros
From: Dave Chinner <david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 3 Dec 2013 09:50:47 +1100
Cc: xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
Delivered-to: xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <20131202104302.GC21394@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
References: <1385689430-10103-1-git-send-email-david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <1385689430-10103-4-git-send-email-david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20131202104302.GC21394@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
On Mon, Dec 02, 2013 at 02:43:02AM -0800, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 29, 2013 at 12:43:38PM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote:
> > From: Dave Chinner <dchinner@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > 
> > They are horrible macros that simply obfuscate the code, so
> > let's factor the code and make them nice functions.
> > 
> > To do this, add a sb_feat_args structure that carries around the
> > variables rather than a strange assortment of variables. This means
> > all the default can be clearly defined in a structure
> > initialisation, and dependent feature bits are easy to check.
> 
> Nice clean,
> 
> Reviewed-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxx>
> 
> But one minor nitpick:
> 
> > +   bool    projid16bit;
> 
> Given that 32-bit projids are the newer feature I'd make them the
> flag instead of inverting it, which is how all the other flags work.

Fair enough - I just converted the existing variables to a
structure. I'll fix that up.

Cheers,

Dave.
-- 
Dave Chinner
david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx

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