From: Dave Chinner <david@fromorbit.com>
To: "Darrick J. Wong" <djwong@kernel.org>
Cc: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>, linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 7/7] xfs: remove XFS_IFEXTENTS
Date: Fri, 16 Apr 2021 09:14:01 +1000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20210415231401.GR63242@dread.disaster.area> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20210414003744.GU3957620@magnolia>
On Tue, Apr 13, 2021 at 05:37:44PM -0700, Darrick J. Wong wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 12, 2021 at 03:38:19PM +0200, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> > The in-memory XFS_IFEXTENTS is now only used to check if an inode with
> > extents still needs the extents to be read into memory before doing
> > operations that need the extent map. Add a new xfs_need_iread_extents
> > helper that returns true for btree format forks that do not have any
> > entries in the in-memory extent btree, and use that instead of checking
> > the XFS_IFEXTENTS flag.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
>
> The series seems reasonable to me, though I wonder if Dave will have
> strong(er) opinions?
No, I've already said I'm fine with making these changes to remove
the ambiguity. I've only briefly scan of the patches, but I didn't
see anything that I disagree with that would make me stop, context
switch and ask to be changed...
Cheers,
Dave.
--
Dave Chinner
david@fromorbit.com
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-04-15 23:14 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 24+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-04-12 13:38 remove the if_flags field in struct xfs_ifork Christoph Hellwig
2021-04-12 13:38 ` [PATCH 1/7] xfs: move the XFS_IFEXTENTS check into xfs_iread_extents Christoph Hellwig
2021-04-13 23:21 ` Darrick J. Wong
2021-04-12 13:38 ` [PATCH 2/7] xfs: rename and simplify xfs_bmap_one_block Christoph Hellwig
2021-04-14 0:05 ` Darrick J. Wong
2021-04-12 13:38 ` [PATCH 3/7] xfs: simplify xfs_attr_remove_args Christoph Hellwig
2021-04-14 0:06 ` Darrick J. Wong
2021-04-12 13:38 ` [PATCH 4/7] xfs: only look at the fork format in xfs_idestroy_fork Christoph Hellwig
2021-04-14 0:08 ` Darrick J. Wong
2021-04-12 13:38 ` [PATCH 5/7] xfs: remove XFS_IFBROOT Christoph Hellwig
2021-04-12 16:03 ` Brian Foster
2021-04-14 15:23 ` Darrick J. Wong
2021-04-14 0:13 ` Darrick J. Wong
2021-04-12 13:38 ` [PATCH 6/7] xfs: remove XFS_IFINLINE Christoph Hellwig
2021-04-12 16:03 ` Brian Foster
2021-04-14 0:33 ` Darrick J. Wong
2021-04-12 13:38 ` [PATCH 7/7] xfs: remove XFS_IFEXTENTS Christoph Hellwig
2021-04-12 16:03 ` Brian Foster
2021-04-14 0:37 ` Darrick J. Wong
2021-04-14 5:59 ` Christoph Hellwig
2021-04-14 15:27 ` Darrick J. Wong
2021-04-14 15:29 ` Christoph Hellwig
2021-04-15 23:14 ` Dave Chinner [this message]
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2021-04-02 14:24 RFC: remove the if_flags field in struct xfs_ifork Christoph Hellwig
2021-04-02 14:24 ` [PATCH 7/7] xfs: remove XFS_IFEXTENTS Christoph Hellwig
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=20210415231401.GR63242@dread.disaster.area \
--to=david@fromorbit.com \
--cc=djwong@kernel.org \
--cc=hch@lst.de \
--cc=linux-xfs@vger.kernel.org \
/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.