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 a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox