[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [PATCH 0/12 v2] Moving i_dquot out of struct inode

To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/12 v2] Moving i_dquot out of struct inode
From: Jan Kara <jack@xxxxxxx>
Date: Sat, 18 Oct 2014 21:26:24 +0200
Cc: Jan Kara <jack@xxxxxxx>, linux-fsdevel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, linux-ext4@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Dave Chinner <david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx, cluster-devel@xxxxxxxxxx, Steven Whitehouse <swhiteho@xxxxxxxxxx>, Mark Fasheh <mfasheh@xxxxxxxx>, Joel Becker <jlbec@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, ocfs2-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx, reiserfs-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Jeff Mahoney <jeffm@xxxxxxx>, Dave Kleikamp <shaggy@xxxxxxxxxx>, jfs-discussion@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, tytso@xxxxxxx, viro@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Delivered-to: xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <20141018151738.GG30355@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
References: <1412952910-7142-1-git-send-email-jack@xxxxxxx> <20141011133452.GA29004@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20141017192428.GA19788@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20141018151738.GG30355@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15)
On Sat 18-10-14 08:17:38, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 09:24:28PM +0200, Jan Kara wrote:
> >   I don't see the 4-bytes per inode saving, what am I missing? Frankly, I
> > don't see a difference in readability but since you and Al agree on that I
> > concede to your taste :)
> It's the removal of s_inode_fields that saves 4 bytes.
  But that was in the superblock, not in the inode...
Jan Kara <jack@xxxxxxx>

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