From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from relay.sgi.com (relay2.corp.sgi.com [137.38.102.29]) by oss.sgi.com (8.14.3/8.14.3/SuSE Linux 0.8) with ESMTP id p97JeCd3258962 for ; Fri, 7 Oct 2011 14:40:12 -0500 Subject: Re: [PATCH 7/9] xfs: clean up xfs_ioerror_alert From: Alex Elder In-Reply-To: <20111006210639.731475087@bombadil.infradead.org> References: <20111006210607.175284390@bombadil.infradead.org> <20111006210639.731475087@bombadil.infradead.org> Date: Fri, 7 Oct 2011 14:37:16 -0500 Message-ID: <1318016236.2810.45.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: xfs@oss.sgi.com On Thu, 2011-10-06 at 17:06 -0400, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > Instead of passing the block number and mount structure explicitly > get them off the bp and fix make the argument order more natural. > > Also move it to xfs_buf.c and stop printing the device name given > that we already get the fs name as part of xfs_alert, and we know > what device is operates on because of the caller that gets printed. > > Signed-off-by: Christoph Hellwig I agree on the name change suggestion, possibly to xfs_buf_error_alert(). Also, with just one exception it seems that the "func" argument is simply the name of the calling function. I would favor adding that via passing __func__ in a macro. If distinguishing between the cases in xlog_sync(), xfs_trans_read_buf(), and xfs_zero_remaining_bytes() were important then the line number could be included. Anyway, looks good. Reviewed-by: Alex Elder _______________________________________________ xfs mailing list xfs@oss.sgi.com http://oss.sgi.com/mailman/listinfo/xfs