[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [PATCH v2 02/10] xfs: consolidate xfs_bulkstat_single

To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, Dave Chinner <david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 02/10] xfs: consolidate xfs_bulkstat_single
From: Jeff Liu <jeff.liu@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 22 Apr 2014 11:13:15 +0800
Cc: "xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx" <xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Delivered-to: xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <20140421235249.GG18672@dastard>
References: <535078AD.5050209@xxxxxxxxxx> <20140421141148.GA27064@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20140421235249.GG18672@dastard>
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.1.0
On 04/22 2014 07:52 PM, Dave Chinner wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 21, 2014 at 07:11:48AM -0700, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
>> On Fri, Apr 18, 2014 at 08:58:21AM +0800, Jeff Liu wrote:
>>> From: Jie Liu <jeff.liu@xxxxxxxxxx>
>>> In xfs_bulkstat_single(), call xfs_bulkstat_one() and xfs_bulkstat()
>>> would return different error if either failed, we'd better return the
>>> proper error in this case.  Moreover, the function argument done is
>>> useless in terms of xfs_ioc_bulkstat(), hence we can get rid of it.
>> I've looked at xfs_bulkstat_single I really can't see how falling back
>> to the full xfs_bulkstat could fix any error.  We probably should just
>> get rid of the fallback and instead do something like the (lightly tested)
>> patch below:
>> ---
>> From: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxx>
>> Subject: xfs: remove xfs_bulkstat_single
>> xfs_bukstat_one doesn't have any failure case that would go away when
>> called through xfs_bulkstat, so remove the fallback and the now unessecary
>> xfs_bulkstat_single function.
>> Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxx>
> *nod*
> I like this approach :)

I reconsidered the call interface in xfs_fsr and xfs_io/parent.
Yep, your idea is better and the patch looks good to me.


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