xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [PATCH 3/7] sanitize xlog_in_core_t definition

To: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/7] sanitize xlog_in_core_t definition
From: Dave Chinner <david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 29 Oct 2008 08:51:11 +1100
Cc: xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <20081028091614.GC1662@infradead.org>
Mail-followup-to: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>, xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
References: <20081027133907.GD1109@infradead.org> <20081028051734.GC17077@disturbed> <20081028091614.GC1662@infradead.org>
Sender: xfs-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17)
On Tue, Oct 28, 2008 at 05:16:14AM -0400, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 28, 2008 at 04:17:34PM +1100, Dave Chinner wrote:
> > > -typedef union xlog_in_core2 {
> > > - xlog_rec_header_t       hic_header;
> > > - xlog_rec_ext_header_t   hic_xheader;
> > > - char                    hic_sector[XLOG_HEADER_SIZE];
> > > -} xlog_in_core_2_t;
> > > -
> > > -typedef struct xlog_in_core {
> > > - xlog_iclog_fields_t     hic_fields;
> > > - xlog_in_core_2_t        *hic_data;
> > > + xlog_in_core_2_t        *ic_data;
> > > +#define ic_header        ic_data->hic_header
> > >  } xlog_in_core_t;
> > 
> > The ic_data pointer should not be on the same cacheline as the
> > reference count seeing as it is read-only field.
> 
> Makes sense, but I'll leave that for a separate patch to keep things
> bisectable.

ok.

Reviewed-by: Dave Chinner <david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>

-- 
Dave Chinner
david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx


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