[PATCH 03/11] xfs: factor out xfs_dir2_leaf_find_stale

[Dave Chinner]

On Mon, Jul 11, 2011 at 05:32:53PM -0500, Alex Elder wrote:
> On Sun, 2011-07-10 at 16:49 -0400, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch at lst.de>
> 
> OK, I guess this is fine.  I have a suggestion below
> but I see nothing truly wrong with what you have.
> 
> Reviewed-by: Alex Elder <aelder at sgi.com>
> 
> > Index: xfs/fs/xfs/xfs_dir2_leaf.c
> > ===================================================================
> > --- xfs.orig/fs/xfs/xfs_dir2_leaf.c	2011-07-09 12:07:49.518499801 +0200
> > +++ xfs/fs/xfs/xfs_dir2_leaf.c	2011-07-09 12:19:48.171796748 +0200
> > @@ -148,6 +148,36 @@ xfs_dir2_block_to_leaf(
> >  	return 0;
> >  }
> >  
> > +STATIC void
> > +xfs_dir2_leaf_find_stale(
> > +	struct xfs_dir2_leaf	*leaf,
> > +	int			index,
> > +	int			*lowstale,
> > +	int			*highstale)
> > +{
> > +	/*
> > +	 * Find the first stale entry before our index, if any.
> > +	 */
> > +	for (*lowstale = index - 1;
> > +	     *lowstale >= 0 &&
> > +		leaf->ents[*lowstale].address !=
> > +		cpu_to_be32(XFS_DIR2_NULL_DATAPTR);
> > +	     --*lowstale)
> > +		continue;

Only thing I was conerned about was the indenting on these loops.
Something like this:

	for (*lowstale = index - 1;
	     *lowstale >= 0 &&
			leaf->ents[*lowstale].address !=
			cpu_to_be32(XFS_DIR2_NULL_DATAPTR);
	     --*lowstale)
		continue;

means that at a glance it is easy to separate the loop control
statements from the body of the loop just by indentation.

Cheers,

Dave.
-- 
Dave Chinner
david at fromorbit.com