From: Alex Elder <aelder@sgi.com>
To: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
Cc: xfs@oss.sgi.com
Subject: Re: [PATCHv2 7/10] xfs: tidy up some goto labels
Date: Wed, 14 Apr 2010 15:20:27 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1271276427.3559.34.camel@doink> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20100412065232.GI2493@dastard>
On Mon, 2010-04-12 at 16:52 +1000, Dave Chinner wrote:
> On Fri, Apr 09, 2010 at 05:29:23PM -0500, Alex Elder wrote:
> > Rename a label used in xlog_find_head() that I thought was poorly
> > chosen. Also combine two adjacent labels xlog_find_tail() into
> > a single label, and give it a more generic name.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Alex Elder <aelder@sgi.com>
> >
> > ---
> > fs/xfs/xfs_log_recover.c | 83 ++++++++++++++++++++++++-----------------------
> > fs/xfs/xfs_log_recover.c | 20 +++++++++-----------
> > 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
> >
> > Index: b/fs/xfs/xfs_log_recover.c
> > ===================================================================
> > --- a/fs/xfs/xfs_log_recover.c
> > +++ b/fs/xfs/xfs_log_recover.c
. . .
> > @@ -757,7 +757,7 @@ xlog_find_head(
> > head_blk = new_blk;
> > }
> >
> > - bad_blk:
> > +fine_tune:
> > /*
> > * Now we need to make sure head_blk is not pointing to a block in
> > * the middle of a log record.
>
> I don't think "fine_tune" really matches what is being done here
> either. "bad_blk" makes sense when you consider that the search is
> being terminated due to a log block being found that didn't match
> the search criteria. i.e. it is bad.
>
> What we are really doing there at "bad_blk" is validating the head
> block we have found, so if you are going to change the label then
> "validate_head" makes more sense to me...
My label came from the idea that at this point
we're refining the estimate of the head of the
log. But I like "validate_head" just as well.
(In my brain "bad_blk" suggests a media problem;
I care more about changing it than about what
it is changed to...)
If I switch it to use your proposed label, can
I get a "Reviewed-by"? (I won't bother re-posting
the patch.)
-Alex
PS I'm still working on reorganizing this file
(including this function) some more, to kill
off a bunch of duplicated code.
_______________________________________________
xfs mailing list
xfs@oss.sgi.com
http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs
prev parent reply other threads:[~2010-04-14 20:18 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 3+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2010-04-09 22:29 [PATCHv2 7/10] xfs: tidy up some goto labels Alex Elder
2010-04-12 6:52 ` Dave Chinner
2010-04-14 20:20 ` Alex Elder [this message]
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1271276427.3559.34.camel@doink \
--to=aelder@sgi.com \
--cc=david@fromorbit.com \
--cc=xfs@oss.sgi.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.