From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from cuda.sgi.com (cuda2.sgi.com [192.48.176.25]) by oss.sgi.com (8.14.3/8.14.3/SuSE Linux 0.8) with ESMTP id o6G5E3OW245808 for ; Fri, 16 Jul 2010 00:14:03 -0500 Date: Fri, 16 Jul 2010 01:17:00 -0400 From: Christoph Hellwig Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/5] xfs: track AGs with reclaimable inodes in per-ag radix tree Message-ID: <20100716051700.GB29915@infradead.org> References: <1279154300-2018-1-git-send-email-david@fromorbit.com> <1279154300-2018-2-git-send-email-david@fromorbit.com> <1279216900.2054.28.camel@doink> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1279216900.2054.28.camel@doink> List-Id: XFS Filesystem from SGI List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com Errors-To: xfs-bounces@oss.sgi.com To: Alex Elder Cc: XFS Mailing List On Thu, Jul 15, 2010 at 01:01:40PM -0500, Alex Elder wrote: > Using the same tag represent a perag with reclaimable > inodes as the tag representing an inode is reclaimable > is nicely consistent... Oh, didn't notice that when reviewing it. Not sure I like it too much. If we ever grow more tags on the perag tree this might get rather confusing. _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs