[PATCH 06/32] xfs: use btree block initialisation functions in growfs

[Dave Chinner]

On Fri, Nov 23, 2012 at 07:40:15AM -0500, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 12, 2012 at 10:53:58PM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote:
> > From: Dave Chinner <dchinner at redhat.com>
> > 
> > Factor xfs_btree_init_block() to be independent of the btree cursor,
> > and use the function to initialise btree blocks in the growfs code.
> > This makes adding support for different format btree blocks simple.
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Dave Chinner <dchinner at redhat.com>
> > ---
> >  fs/xfs/xfs_btree.c |   33 ++++++++++++++++++++++++---------
> >  fs/xfs/xfs_btree.h |   11 +++++++++++
> >  fs/xfs/xfs_fsops.c |   37 +++++++++++++------------------------
> >  3 files changed, 48 insertions(+), 33 deletions(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/fs/xfs/xfs_btree.c b/fs/xfs/xfs_btree.c
> > index e53e317..121ea99 100644
> > --- a/fs/xfs/xfs_btree.c
> > +++ b/fs/xfs/xfs_btree.c
> > @@ -853,18 +853,22 @@ xfs_btree_set_sibling(
> >  	}
> >  }
> >  
> > -STATIC void
> > +void
> >  xfs_btree_init_block(
> > -	struct xfs_btree_cur	*cur,
> > -	int			level,
> > -	int			numrecs,
> > -	struct xfs_btree_block	*new)	/* new block */
> > +	struct xfs_mount *mp,
> > +	struct xfs_buf	*bp,
> 
> Do we need the mount argument here?  bp->b_mount should always
> be initialized.

Possible.

> > +	__u32		magic,
> > +	__u16		level,
> > +	__u16		numrecs,
> > +	unsigned int	flags)
> >  {
> > -	new->bb_magic = cpu_to_be32(xfs_magics[cur->bc_btnum]);
> > +	struct xfs_btree_block	*new = XFS_BUF_TO_BLOCK(bp);
> 
> Any reaosn not to pass the btree_block directly instead of the buffer?

CRC additions require the block number to be put into the structure,
so we need to pass the buffer.

> 
> > +STATIC void
> > +xfs_btree_init_block_cur(
> > +	struct xfs_btree_cur	*cur,
> > +	int			level,
> > +	int			numrecs,
> > +	struct xfs_buf		*bp)
> > +{
> > +	xfs_btree_init_block(cur->bc_mp, bp, xfs_magics[cur->bc_btnum],
> > +			       level, numrecs, cur->bc_flags);
> 
> I'd scrapt this helper.

I only used it to avoid changing existing code. I can remove it when
CRCs are introduced if you want, as this touches all this code
again.

Cheers,

Dave.
-- 
Dave Chinner
david at fromorbit.com