Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[PATCH\s+7\/7\]\s+split\s+up\s+xlog_recover_process

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[PATCH\s+7\/7\]\s+split\s+up\s+xlog_recover_process_iunlinks\s*$/: 15 ]

Total 15 documents matching your query.

1. move xfs_vfs.h (score: 1): Author: xxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Mon, 27 Oct 2008 09:39:38 -0400; Split out the body of the main loop into a separate helper to make the code readable. Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxx> Index: linux-2.6-xfs/fs/xfs/xfs_log_recover.c == -- linux-2.6-xfs.o; /archives/xfs/2008-10/msg00621.html (14,669 bytes)
2. 2/3] remove restricted_chown parameter (score: 1): Author: xxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Tue, 28 Oct 2008 18:17:50 +1100; ..... Jumping to 'fail' at this point leaks the xfs_inode returned from xfs_iget(). Hmmmm - it appears the original code leaked too.... Also, I don't think we need the assert for ip, either. If it's; /archives/xfs/2008-10/msg00669.html (10,112 bytes)
3. helper (score: 1): Author: s@xxxxxxxxx>; Date: Tue, 28 Oct 2008 05:14:46 -0400; Yeah. I'll fix this in a separate patch as this one is just suposed to be purely refactoring.; /archives/xfs/2008-10/msg00674.html (8,663 bytes)
4. inition (score: 1): Author: avid@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Wed, 29 Oct 2008 08:51:33 +1100; Ok, sounds fair. Reviewed-by: Dave Chinner <david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> -- Dave Chinner david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx; /archives/xfs/2008-10/msg00691.html (9,414 bytes)
5. node64 mount option on 32 bit systems (score: 1): Author: ellwig <hch@xxxxxx>; Date: Sun, 26 Oct 2008 16:35:33 -0400; Split out the body of the main loop into a separate helper to make the code readable. Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxx> Index: linux-2.6-xfs/fs/xfs/xfs_log_recover.c == -- linux-2.6-xfs.o; /archives/xfs/2008-10/msg00801.html (14,643 bytes)
6. s_getbmap to take formatter functions (score: 1): Author: >; Date: Sun, 26 Oct 2008 16:35:33 -0400; Split out the body of the main loop into a separate helper to make the code readable. Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxx> Index: linux-2.6-xfs/fs/xfs/xfs_log_recover.c == -- linux-2.6-xfs.o; /archives/xfs/2008-10/msg01410.html (14,643 bytes)
7. ы данных (score: 1): Author: toph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Mon, 27 Oct 2008 09:39:38 -0400; Split out the body of the main loop into a separate helper to make the code readable. Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxx> Index: linux-2.6-xfs/fs/xfs/xfs_log_recover.c == -- linux-2.6-xfs.o; /archives/xfs/2008-10/msg01479.html (14,480 bytes)
8. Map a disk LBA to filename? (score: 1): Author: ve Chinner <david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Tue, 28 Oct 2008 18:17:50 +1100; ..... Jumping to 'fail' at this point leaks the xfs_inode returned from xfs_iget(). Hmmmm - it appears the original code leaked too.... Also, I don't think we need the assert for ip, either. If it's; /archives/xfs/2008-10/msg01527.html (9,919 bytes)
9. ap a disk LBA to filename? (score: 1): Author: artin Steigerwald <ms@xxxxxxxxx>; Date: Tue, 28 Oct 2008 05:14:46 -0400; Yeah. I'll fix this in a separate patch as this one is just suposed to be purely refactoring.; /archives/xfs/2008-10/msg01532.html (8,484 bytes)
10. chown parameter from xfs linux (score: 1): Author: xxx>; Date: Wed, 29 Oct 2008 08:51:33 +1100; Ok, sounds fair. Reviewed-by: Dave Chinner <david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> -- Dave Chinner david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx; /archives/xfs/2008-10/msg01549.html (9,235 bytes)
11. [PATCH 7/7] split up xlog_recover_process_iunlinks (score: 1): Author: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxx>; Date: Sun, 26 Oct 2008 16:35:33 -0400; Split out the body of the main loop into a separate helper to make the code readable. Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxx> Index: linux-2.6-xfs/fs/xfs/xfs_log_recover.c == -- linux-2.6-xfs.o; /archives/xfs/2008-10/msg02228.html (14,643 bytes)
12. [PATCH 7/7] split up xlog_recover_process_iunlinks (score: 1): Author: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Mon, 27 Oct 2008 09:39:38 -0400; Split out the body of the main loop into a separate helper to make the code readable. Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxx> Index: linux-2.6-xfs/fs/xfs/xfs_log_recover.c == -- linux-2.6-xfs.o; /archives/xfs/2008-10/msg02297.html (14,480 bytes)
13. Re: [PATCH 7/7] split up xlog_recover_process_iunlinks (score: 1): Author: Dave Chinner <david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Tue, 28 Oct 2008 18:17:50 +1100; ..... Jumping to 'fail' at this point leaks the xfs_inode returned from xfs_iget(). Hmmmm - it appears the original code leaked too.... Also, I don't think we need the assert for ip, either. If it's; /archives/xfs/2008-10/msg02345.html (9,977 bytes)
14. Re: [PATCH 7/7] split up xlog_recover_process_iunlinks (score: 1): Author: Christoph Hellwig <hch@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Tue, 28 Oct 2008 05:14:46 -0400; Yeah. I'll fix this in a separate patch as this one is just suposed to be purely refactoring.; /archives/xfs/2008-10/msg02350.html (8,627 bytes)
15. Re: [PATCH 7/7] split up xlog_recover_process_iunlinks (score: 1): Author: Dave Chinner <david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Date: Wed, 29 Oct 2008 08:51:33 +1100; Ok, sounds fair. Reviewed-by: Dave Chinner <david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> -- Dave Chinner david@xxxxxxxxxxxxx; /archives/xfs/2008-10/msg02367.html (9,379 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 15
Page: [1]