From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from relay.sgi.com (relay1.corp.sgi.com [137.38.102.111]) by oss.sgi.com (8.14.3/8.14.3/SuSE Linux 0.8) with ESMTP id p82MNC5e092485 for ; Fri, 2 Sep 2011 17:23:12 -0500 Subject: Re: [PATCH 04/25] xfs: factor extent map manipulations out of xfs_bmapi From: Alex Elder In-Reply-To: <20110824060641.102703569@bombadil.infradead.org> References: <20110824060428.789245205@bombadil.infradead.org> <20110824060641.102703569@bombadil.infradead.org> Date: Fri, 2 Sep 2011 17:23:11 -0500 Message-ID: <1315002191.2069.84.camel@doink> MIME-Version: 1.0 Reply-To: aelder@sgi.com 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: Christoph Hellwig Cc: Dave Chinner , xfs@oss.sgi.com On Wed, 2011-08-24 at 02:04 -0400, Christoph Hellwig wrote: Unfortunately the content of the new xfs_bmapi_update_map() is as hideous as it was before, but at least it's isolated. The -1 index values are just awful, even if we do know from the logic that they're indexing non-negative offsets into the underlying array. I do think it's good that you encapsulated this without changing the existing logic, but someday maybe this function can be improved. Reviewed-by: Alex Elder You included no signoff. I am going to assume it included this like the rest of the series: Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs