[PATCH 07/14] repair: use single prefetch queue

[Alex Elder]

Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> We don't need two prefetch queues as we guarantee execution in order anyway.
> 
> XXX: description could use some more details.
> 
> 
> Signed-off-by: Barry Naujok <bnaujok at sgi.com>
> Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch at lst.de>

One nit-picky comment below, but looks good.

Reviewed-by: Alex Elder <aelder at sgi.com>

> Index: xfsprogs-dev/repair/prefetch.c
> ===================================================================
> --- xfsprogs-dev.orig/repair/prefetch.c	2009-08-20 00:14:08.000000000 +0000
> +++ xfsprogs-dev/repair/prefetch.c	2009-08-20 00:16:01.000000000 +0000

. . .

The following hunk doesn't really do anything but change whitespace.
It'd be nice if those changes (when there's a bunch like this) were
limited to a separate no-op patch.

> @@ -440,21 +442,22 @@
>  		 */
>  		first_off = LIBXFS_BBTOOFF64(XFS_BUF_ADDR(bplist[0]));
>  		last_off = LIBXFS_BBTOOFF64(XFS_BUF_ADDR(bplist[num-1])) +
> -			XFS_BUF_SIZE(bplist[num-1]);
> +						XFS_BUF_SIZE(bplist[num-1]);
>  		while (last_off - first_off > pf_max_bytes) {
>  			num--;
> -			last_off = LIBXFS_BBTOOFF64(XFS_BUF_ADDR(bplist[num-1])) +
> -				XFS_BUF_SIZE(bplist[num-1]);
> +			last_off = LIBXFS_BBTOOFF64(XFS_BUF_ADDR(
> +				bplist[num-1])) + XFS_BUF_SIZE(bplist[num-1]);
>  		}
> -		if (num < ((last_off - first_off) >> (mp->m_sb.sb_blocklog + 3))) {
> +		if (num < ((last_off - first_off) >>
> +						(mp->m_sb.sb_blocklog + 3))) {
>  			/*
>  			 * not enough blocks for one big read, so determine
>  			 * the number of blocks that are close enough.
>  			 */
>  			last_off = first_off + XFS_BUF_SIZE(bplist[0]);
>  			for (i = 1; i < num; i++) {
> -				next_off = LIBXFS_BBTOOFF64(XFS_BUF_ADDR(bplist[i])) +
> -						XFS_BUF_SIZE(bplist[i]);
> +				next_off = LIBXFS_BBTOOFF64(XFS_BUF_ADDR(
> +					bplist[i])) + XFS_BUF_SIZE(bplist[i]);
>  				if (next_off - last_off > pf_batch_bytes)
>  					break;
>  				last_off = next_off;