From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Chris Mason Subject: Re: Btrfs for mainline Date: Fri, 02 Jan 2009 13:06:24 -0500 Message-ID: <1230919584.7538.16.camel@think.oraclecorp.com> References: <1230722935.4680.5.camel@think.oraclecorp.com> <20081231104533.abfb1cf9.akpm@linux-foundation.org> <1230765549.7538.8.camel@think.oraclecorp.com> <20090103.013755.42849152.ryusuke@osrg.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Cc: akpm@linux-foundation.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org, linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org To: Ryusuke Konishi Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20090103.013755.42849152.ryusuke@osrg.net> List-ID: On Sat, 2009-01-03 at 01:37 +0900, Ryusuke Konishi wrote: > Hi, > On Wed, 31 Dec 2008 18:19:09 -0500, Chris Mason wrote: > > > > This has only btrfs as a module and would be the fastest way to see > > the .c files. btrfs doesn't have any changes outside of fs/Makefile and > > fs/Kconfig > > I found some overlapping (or cloned) functions in > btrfs-unstable.git/fs/btrfs, for example: > > - Declarations to apply hardware crc32c in fs/btrfs/crc32c.h: > The same code is found in arch/x86/crypto/crc32c-intel.c > Yes, I can just remove the btrfs version of this for now. > - btrfs_wait_on_page_writeback_range() and btrfs_fdatawrite_range(): > These are clones of wait_on_page_writeback_range() and > __filemap_fdatawrite_range() respectively, and can be removed if they > are just exported. > > - Copies of add_to_page_cache_lru() found in compression.c and extent_io.c > (can be replaced if it's exported) > > How about including patches to resolve these in the btrfs kernel tree > (or patchset to be posted) ? > My plan was to export those after btrfs was actually in. But on Monday I'll send along a patch to export them and make compat functions in btrfs. > In addition, there seem to be well-separated reusable routines such as > async-thread (enhanced workqueue) and extent_map. Do you intend to > move these into lib/ or so? > > I also tried scripts/checkpatch.pl against btrfs, and it has detected > 45 ERRORs and 93 WARNINGs. I think it's a good opportunity to clean > up these violations. Good point, thanks for looking at the code. -chris