xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

RE: [PATCH 0/7] inode allocation cleanups

To: "Christoph Hellwig" <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: RE: [PATCH 0/7] inode allocation cleanups
From: "Alex Elder" <aelder@xxxxxxx>
Date: Tue, 25 Aug 2009 12:57:16 -0500
Cc: <xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx>
In-reply-to: <20090824153030.GA19864@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Thread-index: Acok0adSRgqyp23VTrS3UIfqFw529wA0HvUQ
Thread-topic: [PATCH 0/7] inode allocation cleanups
> ping?  any reviewers for this?

I no longer have these in my mailbox, but I've reviewed them
all, and they all look good.  Very nice result of getting rid
of duplication and making functions a more manageable size.
One comment on patch 5 below.

                                        -Alex

# [PATCH 1/7] xfs: factor out inode initialisation   Christoph Hellwig
Reviewed-by: Alex Elder <aelder@xxxxxxx>

# [PATCH 2/7] xfs: improve xfs_inobt_get_rec prototype   Christoph Hellwig
Reviewed-by: Alex Elder <aelder@xxxxxxx>

# [PATCH 3/7] xfs: improve xfs_inobt_update prototype   Christoph Hellwig
Reviewed-by: Alex Elder <aelder@xxxxxxx>

# [PATCH 4/7] xfs: factor out debug checks from xfs_dialloc and xfs_difree   
Christoph Hellwig
Reviewed-by: Alex Elder <aelder@xxxxxxx>

# [PATCH 5/7] xfs: untangle xfs_dialloc   Christoph Hellwig
    No cursor cleanup on WANT_CORRUPTED_RETURN() just after "if (pagno == 
agno)".
    (Maybe I'm misreading the patch.)  I realize this is still better than the
    ASSERT() in place currently, but maybe it should be 
WANT_CORRUPTED_GOTO(error0)
    instead.
Reviewed-by: Alex Elder <aelder@xxxxxxx>

# [PATCH 6/7] xfs: rationalize xfs_inobt_lookup*   Christoph Hellwig
Reviewed-by: Alex Elder <aelder@xxxxxxx>

# [PATCH 7/7] xfs: speed up free inode search   Christoph Hellwig 
Reviewed-by: Alex Elder <aelder@xxxxxxx>

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